The Conjuring

Have you ever wondered what The Exorcist may have been like if it sucked?  Look no further than the latest hyped horror hit The Conjuring which, despite reading numerous raving reviews for, seems to be yet another dud in the annals of modern horror.  I managed to crawl out of my hole to see this one in a theater packed with folks who I don’t think have ever seen a horror film before and, nearly two hours later (yes, The Conjuring is like 111 minutes long), I left unimpressed and feeling like I wasted mine and my girlfriend’s time.  I am not going to spend a lot of time on this one but I mention The Exorcist because The Conjuring more or less rips off the aforementioned film’s, well, just about everything, heh.  You have a house and a demon that resides within said house who eventually resides in a female medium who doesn’t like Jesus Christ and a couple of firm believers and a happy family to come along and save the day.  Okay, so it’s not exactly The Exorcist but you get the point; the characterization in The Exorcist wasn’t based on caricatures of one-dimensional characters and the depth of the film’s power and atmosphere mesmerize to this day while The Conjuring is so by-the-numbers you would have thought it was made for television.  The holy couple who happen to also be a very serious ghostbusting couple are so over-the-top with their Christianity that it becomes nauseating to hear the “God brought us together” line numerous times throughout The Conjuring’s duration.  The movie’s pacing is also worth noting because what we have here is a nearly two-hour horror film (usually a bad idea) that feels as if it’s four hours because every scene builds to a point where the scare is so ineffective just due to the fact you’ve waited two minutes for it to be over with instead of waiting with bated, tight breath.  The Conjuring’s redeeming factors?  Not a bucketload of swearing and CGI (there’s some, however) and an okay atmosphere for a haunted house flick (by today’s standards anyway but you’d be much better off with something like The Changeling).  The Conjuring’s spectacular factors?  None!  Hmm, I think that is about all I have to say about The Conjuring, another very disappointing effort from post-2000 horror that will hopefully be forgotten as quickly as it came into being.  Avoid.

City Of The Living Dead / The Gates Of Hell

I have been a fan of European horror cinema for as long as I can remember, being introduced to it through Argento’s classic Suspiria picture back in the early 2000s.  Lucio Fulci, along with the likes of the aforementioned Argento and Bava, is heralded as one of the godfathers of European/Italian horror cinema and I can think of no argument against it.  With films like Zombie, The Beyond, The House By The Cemetery and the film in question today – City Of The Living Dead (also known as The Gates Of Hell) – under Fulci’s belt it comes as no surprise that he is hailed as one of the best of the best.  I decided to watch City Of The Living Dead last night since it had been a while since I watched it and, after a good 15 to 20 lifetime viewings of this picture, I still consider it to be an utmost masterpiece and my personal favorite Fulci film.

Many European horror movies have something that most of the American pictures lack and this is atmosphere – eerie, brooding, horrific atmosphere.  Fulci, along with Bava, presents the viewer with some of the most atmospheric cinematography ever seen in the genre and this alone makes a film like City Of The Living Dead a masterpiece to me.  Oftentimes I watch a horror film because I want to escape within it, to experience it from the inside looking out and atmosphere, at least for me, is the one-way express ticket for such an experience.  It is perhaps comparable to listening to an ambient piece of music that puts one in a particular mood or mindset.  Do any of you experience films of this nature in a similar fashion?

Cinematography and atmosphere aside, City Of The Living Dead takes everything a zombie film should be and shrouds it in exquisite eeriness.  Fulci adopts a less is more approach with The Gates Of Hell as it’s a zombie film that’s not overrun by zombies; that’s right!  When the undead do make an appearance they are just that much more harrowing and frightening due to their scarcity and somewhat unorthodox appearance.  When one ventures into the crypt towards the end of the film they will experience exactly what I am talking about – zombies that nearly transcend themselves by looking as much like spectral phantasms as they do the undead.  I applaud Fulci on this as I’ve seen many zombie films and few have had such uniquely tailored and effective undead.  Did I mention Fabio Frizzi’s score?  It’s one of the best, no doubt, and accompanies City Of The Living Dead’s atmosphere perfectly.

What can I say?  The Gates Of Hell is a masterpiece of European horror cinema that stands up to the best of the best to this day.  If you haven’t seen this gem then I strongly urge you to bump it up high on your wishlist or, if you’ve already had the pleasure, then why not delve into its depths once again?  City Of The Living Dead is one of Italian horror’s best films – period.  An essential masterpiece!

Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later

The Halloween series is somewhat of a long and convoluted mess of sequels that involves a couple different timelines and various interpretations so, when it comes to the seventh film, one may simply ask “why bother?”  Believe it or not, Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later isn’t all that bad considering.  Yup, I said it, the seventh installment in a film series inspired by the success of an original film really isn’t as treacherous as one would anticipate.  For starters, Halloween H20 essentially continues where the second Halloween film ended (albeit twenty years later) as it ignores the events that happened in the fourth through sixth films.  The third Halloween – the underrated Season Of The Witch – has nothing to do with the Halloween storyline so that one doesn’t count … confused yet?  It’s okay, I was at first too.  In a nutshell, if you’ve only seen the first two Halloween flicks then you’re okay to skip right over to this one since this is the so-called “spiritual successor” of those two.

Halloween H20 has Steve Miner (the guy who directed House and Warlock) and Jamie Lee Curtis going for it which probably helped in saving it from complete mediocrity from the beginning.  For those unfamiliar, Curtis played the now legendary Laurie Strode character featured in the first two Halloween pictures and returned to reprise her role in Halloween H20.  She, as one could anticipate, is an overly protective and somewhat paranoid mother that, even after twenty years, is haunted by the “shape” (hopefully someone gets this reference) of Michael Myers.  Janet Leigh (the lady who got killed in the shower in the original Psycho) plays a small role in the film which is a bit interesting since she is Jamie Lee Curtis’ mother and hadn’t starred in a feature film since John Carpenter’s The Fog (from 1980) which also featured both Leigh and Curtis.  Anyway, despite having a couple of solid actors (and a few not-so-solid ones – LL Cool J, anyone?) and a solid atmosphere, Halloween H20 does suffer considerably when it comes to the pacing.  The movie is kind of over before you know it (despite it being nearly 90 minutes) and this I attribute to the film’s lack of tension-building.  Sure, there’s the inevitable “almost-had-you” chase scene and all of that but Myers never manages to invoke that genuine sense of terror and dread that we all know and love from the original Halloween; heck, even when taking the original out of the equation, you still get a more dreadful Myers in any of the other sequels.  As I briefly mentioned earlier, however, the film’s atmosphere is pretty spot-on and there’s more than a few references to various other horror films (including the original Halloween) that will undoubtedly be a treat for the genre lovers out there.

Halloween H20 is far from being a masterpiece but it’s not too shabby for what it is either.  Although I fully admit to having a soft spot for the Halloween series moreso than any of its competitors (Friday The 13th, A Nightmare On Elm Street, Hellraiser and so on), I still think any casual fan of the series will find some, at the very least, aesthetic enjoyment in watching Halloween H20.  If you find it new for four dollars on blu-ray it’s worth picking up since that’s exactly what I did … just don’t spend more than ten, okay?  Recommended for fans of the series and those with an inkling towards moderately bad taste.

Nuit Noire (Black Night)

Olivier Smolders is a more or less unknown director from the Democratic Republic Of Congo that, to this date, has only one full-length feature film under his belt: the marvelous, Kafkaesque Nuit Noire (meaning “black night” in English).  I read about this particular film some years ago in what I presume to be an ad in Rue Morgue (I can’t quite remember) although it wasn’t until very recently that I actually came across a copy to add to the collection.  I am quite a fan of Franz Kafka and have been ever since I read The Metamorphosis when I was a lad although I’ve noticed that, despite his popularity in existential circles and elsewhere, it seems his influence on film has been minimal; or, perhaps it is better to say that there are only a few films I have seen that actually possess an atmosphere and aura that would be considered wholly and undeniably Kafka.  Nuit Noire, along with the likes of Soderbergh’s grossly underrated Kafka (ironic, huh?) and Polanski’s The Tenant, is one such rarity to have Kafka written all over it.

The horror elements in Nuit Noire are light at best but they’re there enough for me to justify writing about this little gem here at Horrific Healing.  While one cannot expect gallons of blood or aggression, there is an abundance of both subtle perversity and darkness (figurative and literal) throughout the film’s duration to appeal to most seasoned horror fans out there.  The dialogue throughout the picture is minimal, the tapestry of its cleverly simple yet highly metaphorical narrative instead being woven by all kinds of arresting imagery and wonderful cinematography that definitely wouldn’t be out of place amidst a David Lynch feature.  I mentioned that the narrative itself was highly metaphorical although it is also worth mentioning that the imagery is highly open to interpretation as well which, depending upon the kind of film-viewer you are, could be a positive or negative thing.  Nuit Noire, very much like the aforementioned David Lynch’s Eraserhead, is highly open to interpretation and meaning.  I personally adore this kind of filmmaking since it allows me to integrate my own interpretations and thoughts into the experience of the film without being necessarily told what I am watching, why I am watching it and how I am to logically go about the film’s content.  Nuit Noire captures this particular spirit of filmmaking perfectly.

All-in-all I was quite impressed by Nuit Noire and wish that I could get my hands on some of Olivier Smolders’ shorts because he seems to have a lot of promise as a filmmaker.  If you’re a fan of Kafka, Lynch, the arty side of horror or just art films in general, I can only recommend the immersive Nuit Noire to you in highest regards because it’s definitely worth seeking out despite its obscurity.  A surprising and wonderful gem!

The Wicker Tree

I imagine some of you have seen This Is Spinal Tap and, in relation to that, all I really want to say about The Wicker Tree is “shit sandwich” but, in an attempt to keep a certain level of quality to my blog, I will elaborate a little bit.

The Wicker Tree is the second part of what is apparently going to be “The Wicker Man trilogy” which unfortunately means that we’re in for yet another modern disaster exploring the themes explored so eloquently and poignantly in the first, then stand-alone film The Wicker Man from 1973.  I am all for the triumph of paganism over Christianity and, in The Wicker Man, we’re given more than a few handfuls of witty, intelligent and spirited heathen ideology that are truly a delight to behold.  The Wicker Tree, despite having the pagan sentiments, offers no new perspectives or ideas and, on the contrary, offers the same perspectives and ideas in a much less convincing and engaging fashion.  The pagan community deserves better, no doubt.

The characterization throughout The Wicker Tree is wretched.  We follow two predictable soon-to-be-wed-and-high-on-the-might-of-God southerners on their trip to Scotland (of all places) to spread the glory of God.  Yeah, the premise is ridiculous, I agree.  Granted, the deaths of said folks could have been satisfying if the film was orchestrated in such a way (I mean, after all, how couldn’t one be cheering with the heathens as the officer was torched in the first film?) but, instead, we’re given anti-climatic, unphilosophical killings that aren’t even creative or gruesome.  When the male of said couple gets eaten (quite literally) I can think of no other word than “cliché” since the scene is shot like one you’d see in any number of the dismal, subpar zombie flicks that come out by the dozens nowadays.  As for the girl’s death, well, heh, it’s perhaps the definition of anti-climatic but hopefully you’ll never find out why because you’d have to sit through nearly every minute of this atrocity to get there and it’s most definitely not worth it.

What can I say?  This film sucks and it sucks hard.  If The Wicker Man was Kill ‘Em All then The Wicker Tree is Load; If The Wicker Man was the original Psycho then The Wicker Tree is the remake … you get the picture: garbage.  I passionately adore the original The Wicker Man, it’s one of the greatest and most inventive films to come from the horror genre and is seeped in a spirited, pagan passion that one rarely, rarely sees in cinema and The Wicker Tree, for all intents and purposes, is its antitheses.  Avoid The Wicker Tree at all costs no matter how curious you are; I could have gone to the dentist or gave myself a swirly but, instead, I watched The Wicker Tree and now I am full of resentment and regret.  A shit sandwich not worth eating!

Subspecies

Vampires films, despite a few of them being amongst my all-time favorites, usually suffer from either a lack of understanding of the Slavic origins of the vampire or a strong desire to be hip and profitable.  Whether it was The Lost Boys then or Twilight now, vampires have been frequently transformed into suave heartthrobs and successful socialites which, of course, is about as far off from their grim origins as one can get.  I enjoy the vampiric aesthetic quite a bit so even I like some of the hipper offerings of the genre (namely Interview With The Vampire, Let Me In and The Lost Boys) but, at the end of the day, I see them for what they are.  Anyway, I guess I went off on a little tangent there but, to get to the matter at hand, we’re discussing Ted Nicolaou’s 1991 effort Subspecies.

Subspecies, despite being rather campy and corny overall, manages to capture the essence of the vampire rather well.  Our antagonist isn’t some guy in a leather jacket who has used too much hair gel, he’s an ugly-as-sin wretch whose desires are misanthropic and, as they say, evil.  Despite this, however, Radu Vladislas (the vampiric antagonist) still manages to be seeped in too much corn syrup due to his general posturing, verbal expressions and, yes, his extra-long fingers don’t help matters much either.  To top it off Radu’s got some imp-like minions that assist him in his dirty work and they are like Ray Harryhausen gone bad … very bad.  These little critters just didn’t do it for me and they are perhaps the one element that strays drastically from traditional vampirism and unfortunately it’s just not a success.  Did I mention they are born out of Radu’s detached fingertips?  Indeed, it’s no joke!

All right, I’ve highlighted what I didn’t like about the film and, at this point, it probably sounds like Subspecies is substandard in every way possible, right?  Wrong.  Subspecies hit the stake right on the head in a few ways and it is these factors that undoubtedly save the film from completely falling from grace.  Subspecies was shot on-location in Romania and the Romanian characterization, honed through the use of accents and some subtle mannerisms, is a definite success throughout the film.  You genuinely feel like you’re in Romania and this kind of escapism in a movie is always more than welcome in my book.  Ted Nicolaou’s cinematography throughout the movie’s duration is also quite solid – better than you’d expect – with more than a few references to Murnau’s immortal Nosferatu shot-wise.  The subtle, quasi-pagan references are noteworthy also.

Bad script-writing, decent acting and excellent atmospherics make Subspecies something of a mixed bag.  If you’re going into this expecting something along the lines of Nosferatu or Nadja then you’re going to be sorely disappointed; on the other hand, if you’re expecting something like a Hammer studio reject than you’re definitely getting warmer.  I am a steadfast horror fan who happens to adore vampires so Subspecies, despite its numerous faults, is a flick I enjoyed well enough and is one I will probably even revisit again in a year or two; from what I understand there’s a few sequels so I may check these out in time, also.  Recommended to horror and/or vampire maniacs and no one else.

Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead

Joe D’Amato is a name that is not likely to raise the eyebrows of any mainstream filmgoer, true, but those of us who spend as much time as we can digging through the archives of European horror will undoubtedly recognize the man responsible for such cult titles as Beyond The Darkness and Antropophagus.  Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead, released during what I consider to be D’Amato’s most relevant filmmaking period (1979 to 1981), is a cross between low-budget European horror and pornography.  Yup, most Euro horror movies are known for their exploitation leanings but Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead, as the title probably implies, is one to go “all the way.”

The quality of a film like this is going to drastically depend upon the reason one is watching it.  Are you watching it go get off on sex or violence or both?  I would say at least one-third (probably more) of Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead consists or either softcore or hardcore pornography whilst the rest of the film explores your usual Italian horror clichés such as poor plot development, gruesome violence and loads of atmosphere.  I, while not expecting any hardcore pornography, was certainly hoping for sleaze, atmosphere and violence and that’s exactly what I got.  If you’re looking for a horror film with any kind of substantial, coherent meaning than I suggest you not only stay away from Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead but Joe D’Amato all together as he openly admitted to sometimes putting artistic value aside in favor of producing something he felt would elicit profits.  It sounds shallow and to some extent it probably is but, then again, it was quite common in Italy during the late 70s and early 80s for filmmakers to emulate American box-office successes (something D’Amato often did) or to simply set out to make what they thought would secure some financial success so, at the end of the day, I don’t hold D’Amato’s perspective against him since sex sells and it sells well.

Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead is a one-dimensional film that is only going to appeal to a pretty niche audience, namely one looking for both sex and horror because, otherwise, there’s too much sex for horror or too much horror for sex.  I enjoyed the film’s atmosphere tremendously and felt the second-half of the film (the horror side) was more rewarding than the first, its eerie island setting being more than appropriate for the surreal, dreamlike zombie scenes that take place upon its sands.  The first half consists of sex, sex and more sex.  What more can I say?  If you’re one with unabashedly bad tastes than I highly recommend Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead to you but, otherwise, I suggest you keep your distance.  All right, now if I could only find that darn bottle cork …

Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers

I recently passed up copies of both Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers and Sleepaway Camp III: Teenage Wasteland that were reasonably priced and, as luck would have it, when I returned to buy them only a couple days later they were gone.  All of us horror hunters have such a tale, I’m sure, of some harder to find title we passed up that we’ve never seen again and although one can order said title online we all know it’s more exciting to actually find it at some hole-in-the-wall shop for a decent price than paying some Amazon price-gauger an absurd amount of money for a tape or disc.  Anyway, it seems that luck was on my side after all since I ran into another copy of Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers (maybe it’s not as rare as I thought?) yesterday and watched it as soon as I was able, the anticipation and excitement running high.  The question remains, of course, was it worth the wait?

Okay, for starters, Sleepaway Camp II is rather different and certainly more purposefully campy and over-the-top than the original.  Whilst the original Sleepaway Camp relied more on a solid mystery plot the second film dives right into excessive sex and violence and does not relent at all … really, I mean it.  Sleepaway Camp II is 79 minutes chockfull of all the genre’s guilty pleasures with none of the genre’s substance; well, okay, the film features one overly insane moralist who only likes good boys and girls and, as you can imagine, there’s not going to be many (if any) people left standing by the tale’s end at a young adult’s summer camp where every one is fooling around with every one every chance they get.  Granted, in slasher films it is not uncommon for there to be a somewhat subtle theme of morality running throughout the film since it’s usually the teen who wasn’t smoking, drinking and being promiscuous that survives while the other ones all end up in bloody chunks but this moral theme is generally not a slasher film’s main focus.  Sleepaway Camp II, no doubt, recognized this trend in slashers and decided to take it as far as it could go with no subtlety or class.  Otherwise, the acting is actually pretty decent considering the kind of film we’re dealing with (especially Pamela Springsteen’s performance) and the gore is actually rather convincing as well.

If you’re looking for a film with any level of substance and depth I would suggest going for some Cronenberg or Lynch but, on the other hand, if you’re looking to have a good time watching a truck-load of teens getting slaughtered in a number of creative ways (how’d you like to be slowly drowned in an outhouse toilet?) then Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers is your one-way ticket to satisfaction.  There’s blood, boobs, mullets, bad jokes, shameless references to the “big three” of 80’s horror (Freddy, Jason and Leatherface) and, yes, there’s even an image of a girl on the film’s poster who never even appears in the movie … what more could you ask for?  A great, fun-filled flick that was definitely worth the wait!  Highly recommended.

Castle Freak

Although the mid-90s weren’t exactly the best time for horror cinema they weren’t devoid of gems either, as made evident by films like In The Mouth Of Madness and, yes, Stuart Gordon’s Castle Freak also.  Very loosely based off of H. P. Lovecraft’s grim, somewhat existential tale The Outsider, Castle Freak revolves itself around a family occupying a European castle that they recently inherited and, as you could imagine, things aren’t quite what they seem.  On the surface Castle Freak almost sounds like it’s going to be a more traditional haunted castle flick but such expectations won’t last long as the film reveals itself throughout its duration.  Castle Freak could very easily have become a rather claustrophobic film taking place only between the walls of the castle but Gordon goes for a bit more of an unorthodox approach that actually ends up adding more to the castle’s hellish atmosphere due to the outside world taking little to no interest in it until things begin to spiral out of control.  I found the aforementioned to be rather effective and I think the film is better off because of it.

The “castle freak” itself is quite a thing to behold, being perhaps one of the most repulsive adversaries I’ve seen in all of horror – indeed, this is one ugly critter!  The full-body make-up job is fantastic and the various little details that build the creature’s being are certainly worth the viewer’s attention.  Despite the fact that the opening sequences of the film attempt to create somewhat of an empathic case for the castle freak the viewer will quickly begin to abhor the creature as it cannibalizes its somewhat limited number of victims with putrid glee.  The acting of both Jeffrey Combs and Barbara Crampton (two Stuart Gordon regulars) is excellent and the supporting cast’s performances aren’t too shabby either.  The castle itself, while not as impressive as something you’d see in one of Corman’s Poe adaptations, is still admirable in its own right.  Unfortunately the castle is at its eerie, majestic best during the first sequence of the film, never quite reaching that same level of malevolence again.  Did I mention that there’s a nice abundance of well-crafted gore throughout Castle Freak as well?  Yup, you’ve got it, there sure is.

Stuart Gordon will always be remembered first and foremost for Re-Animator, this much is most certainly true, but his body of work includes a number of delightful, Lovecraft-inspired horror pieces that are all gems in their own right, deserving of a place in any horror connoisseur’s collection, no doubt.  Castle Freak will probably never go beyond the “cult classic” tag (if its even got that) but horror fans know a film’s reputation isn’t nearly as important as the film itself so consider picking up Castle Freak the next time you’re on the hunt for some new flicks, you won’t be disappointed!  Recommended.

Burnt Offerings

My days have been rather busy as of late but I figured it was about time I contribute another review to my blog here as it’s been a bit too long since the last entry, unfortunately.  I was in the mood for a haunted house flick yesterday and decided to give Burnt Offerings, a little gem from the mid 70s, a spin.  Let me start by saying that if you’re one for fast-paced, gore-drenched, boob-flashing horror and said films alone than I strongly suggest you stay as far away from Burnt Offerings as you can for it is a film rooted in traditions rather than the contemporaries of its time.  Indeed, by the time the mid-70s had rolled around there were all kinds of nasty flicks floating about so, in a sense, Burnt Offerings would have been better off coming out during a time when the audience’s senses weren’t bludgeoned by films like The Last House On The Left and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  Burnt Offerings, as you could anticipate, was poorly received by critics (not that that really matters) at the time of its release but has since gained some favor amongst horror fans, myself included.

Burnt Offerings is, on the surface, a classic haunted house picture that takes place in a foreboding, melancholic and ornate mansion where the feelings of isolation and tension grow throughout every frame of the film.  As I hinted at earlier, the pacing of Burnt Offerings may seem a bit slow for those who prefer 90 minute screamfests but the pacing actually compliments the film’s atmosphere of a family’s sanity slowly spiraling out of control tremendously.  Dan Curtis, perhaps best known for his series Dark Shadows, has a very traditional sense of cinematic composition and this shines quite beautifully throughout Burnt Offerings – all of the scenes have a certain elegance about them which is in-part due to how the film is shot, no doubt.  The acting in Burnt Offerings is also rooted in classic tradition which certainly isn’t hard to believe with names like Oliver Reed, Burgess Meredith and Karen Black attached to it; Reed’s performance as an intense, serious man is as convincing as ever and Black’s portrayal of an impressionable and dutiful product of her time is excellent as well.  Burnt Offering’s minimal, eerie and ever-appropriate score deserves a special mention also – it’s quite appropriate and contributes to the film’s aesthetic nicely.

If you’re a fan of more traditional horror and like a good haunted house movie than Burnt Offerings should be right up your alley.  For what the film lacks in gore and intensity it makes up for with a great sense of tension and an impenetrable atmosphere that is about as good as it gets for this sort of film, championed perhaps only by Medak’s The Changeling from 1980 (which I am a rather big fan of).  All-in-all, Burnt Offerings is a solid flick that I am glad I finally decided to watch; recommended!