31 Days of Halloween

Ooo I think my campus library has that as well, so it's coming.

ZERO DAYS OF HALLOWEEN

MOVIES THAT DIDN'T MAKE THE CUT

In the past, Doomsday and IanTheCool have inquired about the process that goes into making 31 Days of Halloween. I can't speak for Dracula , PG Cooper or PhantomKnight but I begin "working" on this in September - sometimes even August. And WAY more than 31 movies are watched or rewatched and not all of them make the cut for various reasons. So just for shits and giggles, here are a few movies that were cut from this year's list.


A KISS BEFORE DYING (1956)



I can't tell if this movie was trying to be a funny or not. It stars Robert Wagner as a college student who murders his girlfriend and then seduces her sister. Most of the movie plays out like a typical 1950's melodrama, but it has abrupt moments of "terror" - including one of the most hilarious murder scenes I've ever seen. So in good conscience I couldn't randomly throw it into 31 Days of Halloween... and it didn't qualify for the "Classical" Movies thread.


NIGHTWING (1979)



Don't let that poster fool you. This isn't a horror movie - AT ALL. Yes, there's killer vampire bats that must be destroyed but those scenes are quick and almost funny to look at. Nightwing is mostly about a Native American deputy officer who must defend his community from an evil curse. I don't know if I would call it a drama per say... but that's mostly what it is. I think it's definitely worth checking out, but it's not really Halloween material.


RAISING CAIN (1992)



Brian De Palma has been a part of 31 Days of Halloween since the beginning and I always look forward to re-visiting his movies. That's why it was difficult to cut Raising Cain from this year's list. It stars John Lithgow as a mad doctor who kidnaps children for experimentation. It sounds like an appropriate movie for Halloween, but it isn't. Instead of his usual Hitchcock-influenced horror, De Palma went for an odd mix of melodrama, dark comedy and self-referential satire. Raising Cain is such a weird movie that I didn't know what to do with it, so I took the safe route and excluded it.


TEACHING MRS. TINGLE (1999)



Man, it's crazy how badly you can misremeber a movie sometimes. My memory of this movie is the complete opposite of what it really is. I thought this was a movie about college students who murder their professor over a bad grade - and then there's a scene of Katie Holmes having sex with that 7th Heaven guy. It's actually a COMEDY about three high school students who hold their teacher hostage at her house because she incorrectly accused them of cheating on the final exam, just weeks before graduation, and they were at risk of being expelled. Oh, and there IS a sex scene with Katie Holmes and that 7th Heaven guy. I remember that part very well. LOL. Oh, and brace yourself. The teacher, Mrs. Tingle, is played by Helen Mirren. I had no idea who Helen Mirren was in 1999, so forgive me for completely forgetting that she played Mrs. Tingle. In my mind, I just pictured a generic old lady. So... yeah... check out this movie. It's definitely worth watching, but it's comedy, so I couldn't include it in the Halloween thread.


HOUSE AT THE END OF THE STREET (2012)

I watched this movie for Jennifer Lawrence's breasts and I can't say I was disappointed. The actual movie itself is a different story. It's about a girl and her mom who move into a neighborhood with a mysterious house. It sounds promising... but... it's just boring. I probably spent 75% of the time on my phone while the movie played in the background. The best I can offer is photos of Jennifer Lawrence's breasts. Enjoy.

That sounds... incredibly bad. Really, that's the plot? I always thought it was like Cape Fear but in an apartment... which also is a shitty concept. But yeah, I'd totally rent to Michael Keaton as long as he stays in Birdman character at all times.

I do like the Jennifer Lawrence gifs though. It's making it very difficult to concentrate at work.

Was that a shitty movie she was under contract for or something? I remember when that came out and the awful, awful reviews it received and couldn't help but think she had to fulfill some obligation.

Alright, I'm going to try to get back into this, I've been pretty busy lately though so I'm pretty sure this won't be like previous years.  I'm definately going to have to resort to recycling reviews from earlier in the year.

Film One: Prometheus (2012)
Well, here’s a movie I still don’t know quite what to think about. I gave this a fairly positive review when I first saw it but had some reservations, and those reservations have been gnawing at me ever since. There’s so much about this movie that I like: it’s visual style is amazing, it actually wants to ask a number of philosophical questions that most Hollywood blockbusters don’t, and there are a handful of really effective scenes. And yet, there are some pretty gaping flaws as well. I think where the movie really loses its way is when it starts trying to be a monster movie. The transforming black goop never really works as a destructive force in the movie and neither do the bald dudes. Additionally I think there characters never quite came together and there are just a bunch of odd directorial choices that weigh the movie down a lot. I was hoping that this viewing would clarify my opinion a bit but… man I still feel all kinds of confused by what my verdict should be. The flaws were as present as ever this time but I still feel like I really, really, really like the movie. Great cinematography, special effects, and location scouting can apparently do a lot to sway me and so does thematic ambition. It’s a great example of a movie that works in spite of itself.

***1/2 out of Four


Film Two: The Babadook (2014)
I’ve long resisted the trend of watching movies through streaming and VOD while they’re still in theaters, but this time I was dealing with a movie that only ever showed up in one theater in my city and it was frankly not a very nice theater. That’s a shame because The Babadook is one of the best horror movies to come along in a while and I feel like it could have actually done pretty good with general audiences were it not for its strange title which sounds like something Adam Sandler would say on a particularly silly day. Actually, the film’s high concept (an evil pop-up book) probably isn’t the easiest thing to explain to general audiences either, but those willing to look past these barriers will find a lot to like in the film. The movie centers on a single mother trying to raise a “special needs” child who can be a real handful at times. One evenening a strange pop-up book shows up in this child’s collection which seems to be summoning a strange demon called The Babadook who begins haunting the family. As the film goes on, this “Babadook” starts to feel both like an actual supernatural force but also like a manifestation of the mother’s frustrations with her child and her situation. The film is really well executed, but I will say that it was a bit more reliant on existing horror formulas then I expected from a movie that’s been touted as the savior of horror cinema. It’s basically The Ring meets The Shining and it actually sits a bit more comfortably amongst contemporary haunting movies like Oculus and Paranormal Activity than I expected. Still, the film’s commitment to a psychological/metaphorical reading along with its avoidance of cheap jump scares does raise it above the competition.

***1/2 out of Four


Film Three: Timecrimes (2007)
I’m not going to spend any time trying to summarize this because it’s really the kind of movie you’re best off watching without any knowledge about what you’re about to see. I’d seen the trailer for the film back around the time the film was being released and it spoiled a little more than it probably should have and I do think that affected this viewing, but I still enjoyed a decent amount of this movie. The film is a low-budget and relatively minimalist take on the time travel film and couldn’t be any more different from the other most famous low budget time travel film, Primer. Where that movie was cold and heavily interested in the science and psychology of time travel, this one is more of a Back to the Future style romp through time paradoxes and whatnot. The weakest part is probably the second act, in part because we already know what happens and it essentially becomes an exercise in inevitability. It does recover for the most part the third act, but I was disappointed in the ultimate ending, which just didn’t really come together in the super-satisfying way that these time travel yarns are usually supposed to. I guess that was the point, but it still didn’t quite resonate and it felt at odds with the relatively playful film that preceded it.


*** out of Four

So I'm going to get a couple Dario Argento films off Netflix for this month. I've only seen Suspiria by him, so I'm leaning towards Deep Red and Inferno. I know he's made nothing but shit since the 90s, but hopefully these two are fun.

Yeah...I'm not sure if I'll be doing this again this year. I suppose maybe I could, depending on what -- if any -- horror movies I watch this month. But if I do, it'll most likely only be for a handful of films.

Whatev's.

I'm going to try but I'm so far behind on my regular reviews that it's going to be difficult. I do have something special planned for November though, so I'll be doing my part for the site then.

I've currently got maybe 8 in mind so far, including a repeat of Prometheus -- does that suit you?

2013 REVIEWS

SUSPIRIA (1977)



Dario Argento began his career as a film critic. Through a friendship with Sergio Leone, he got his foot through the door of the Italian entertainment business and became one of the screenwriters on Once Upon a Time in the West. That lead to his directorial debut in 1970. Then, after a series of successful giallo movies, he made his global mark with the supernatural horror classic, Suspiria. It’s about a young woman who enrolls at a ballet school in Germany and later discovers that it’s a coven for witches. But the plot doesn’t really matter. The strength and appeal of Suspiria comes from the way that Argento and his collaborators give viewers the sense that they’re experiencing a nightmare. It’s very hardcore stuff and definitely not suitable for the faint of heart.


INFERNO (1980)



The semi-sequel to Suspiria uses the same signature style but this time tells a much more coherent story. A woman in New York City discovers that she might be living in an apartment building owned by witches and informs her brother in Rome about it. But not too long afterwards, she disappears. So her brother travels to New York to find out what happened. Meanwhile, strange things begin to occur around him. Since this movie is more concerned with story and characters, it doesn’t mash well with Argento’s dream-like visual style. Everything comes across as overly-theatrical and silly. I might be in the minority, but I didn’t care too much for this one. Especially since Goblin didn’t work on the soundtrack. That was a huge piece of the puzzle that was missing.


TENEBRE (1982)



Despite worldwide success, Dario Argento attracted lots of controversy for his recurring depiction of violence against women. The fact that he usually cast his wife in a major role and then had her killed was discussed heavily among critical circles. And this was before his daughter was old enough to star in his movies and become his favorite new victim. To put it mildly, Argento is a weird person. So it should come as no surprise that Tenebre is a tongue-n-cheek thriller directed at his critics. The plot revolves around a serial killer who commits crimes based on the works of his favorite mystery novelist. The police officer put in charge of the investigation is also a fan of the books and thinks he has everything figured out. But the creative mind of the author isn’t a true reflection of the killer and he learns that the hard way. Also, in a change of pace, most of the murders take place in broad daylight and are accompanied by a funky soundtrack written by Goblin. It’s almost comical and definitely cheesy. You can tell Argento had loads of fun with this one. And you probably will too if you enjoy a good dark comedy.


PHENOMENA (1985)



Phenomena is the closest Dario Argento has ever come to making a children’s movie. In fact, in the United States, it sort-of was released as one. New Line Cinema eliminated 30 minutes, toned down the violence, and re-titled it Creepers. And I can see why. The film is about a sleepwalking, bug-loving, and psychic teenager played by Jennifer Connelly. She’s attending a boarding school in Germany and there’s a serial killer roaming around who loves to murder these under-aged girls. But with her special abilities and animal friends, she’s able to defeat the forces of evil. It’s very silly but also very entertaining. The ending, in particular, is a combination of thrills and laughs. If you’re willing to go along with it, you’ll probably enjoy it.


Speaking of movies that "didn't make the cut", I watched but didn't review The Bird with the Crystal Plumage (1970) and Opera (1987). Both are okay.

Day Eight: I Walked with a Zombie



Zombies are such a standard part of our pop-culture that it's hard to remember a time before Night of the Living Dead where zombies were totally different. In movies like I Walked with a Zombie, the living dead are actually voodoo slaves than mindless flesh eaters. It's a cool depiction of zombies, and the zombie visuals here are pretty striking. In fact, the visuals in the whole film are really, really good. This may technically be a B movie, but the cinematography and lighting are so strong it could be an A-movie. I can tell why Jacques Tourneur was quickly tapped to direct Hollywood films. The film maintains a nice sense of atmosphere and there's a feeling of mystery which elevates the work. Overall, the actual story here doesn't really amount to match, but the style was more than enough to keep me going.

B