azgolfguy Reviews

Curse of the Demon (1957)

One of the classics

[8/10 · 8 February 2007]

This piece has stuck with me since I saw it as a child in about 1960. Our family enjoyed horror films, and we always thought that this one was memorable. Seeing it again recently, I haven't changed my mind. Given the effects available at the time and the creepiness factor, I've always though this was one of the better of the older horror movies around.

It is quaint, British, and builds slowly after the initial shock. Some comments say it was boring, shouldn't have shown the creature, Dana Andrews was drunk and sucked, etc. It isn't perfect, but like "The Haunting" and a few others made around that time, it succeeds well in creating an unsettling and generally engaging mood, including some humor, on a very small budget. I still think that the creature F/X was excellent for its time. I can imagine the film without seeing the creature, and maybe that would have been even more effective, again like "The Haunting".

I give it "A-" for effort and execution, and for avid horror buffs, it's definitely worth a watch or two. I've tested this one out with some younger folks, and they seem to really like it. Even a jaded younger horror fan used to blatant gore and in your face monsters said, "That creeped me out." FYI, the "Night" vs. "Curse" versions are different by several minutes of extra footage, which I recall was the séance scene and some connective dialog.

Black Christmas (2006)

Another awful remake

[2/10 · 29 January 2007]

Well, call me old school, but to say that this movie was as good or better than the original is confounding and appalling. Scanning some of the comments, I find it interesting that some folks downgrade the original 1974 version because it leaves loose ends, and the new one explains things. I will say that the remake does provide a back story on the killer lacking in the original, but that doesn't make it any better. Quite the contrary. Another slash and gore bore.

The subtle atmospheric dread and suspense BC 1974 in the old version, while not great, is vastly superior. It is hard to improve on one of the best of the genre, and the original Black Christmas certainly belongs near the top. It did influence Halloween, When A Stranger Calls, Friday the 13th I and other classics of a few years later and is as good or better than all of them.

The 2006 version belongs near the back of the rental area at your local DVD store. Watch it on cable some night, but for those who have seen neither, ignore the new version and find a copy of the old one to buy or rent. You'll be better served for your DVD dollar.

A final editorial comment: I have yet to see a 200X horror film remake that came close to the original in spite of all the FX technology.....e.g. The Haunting. No, the Thirteen Ghosts remake was better, but only because the old Castle version was so cheap and campy. One man's opinion is that the Black Christmas remake would have been better not made. Final Destination I (at least) was quite unusual and quality in this genre.

Session 9 (2001)

I fall into the "good" category

[8/10 · 20 January 2007]

Having had the benefit of skimming through 5 years of comments and read the vast differences of opinion on the movie, I have to say that I thought it was quite good with some flaws. I'm not a movie critic like some of the folks here think they are, but I react from the gut, and this movie hit me there most of the time. To me, it was very disturbing and creepy, and generally that makes for a good horror film in my book.

Yes, there are holes in the plot and red herrings, but David Lynch uses those as well, and they don't bother me. Not everything has to be resolved and tied up for a movie to be worthwhile. I would have liked to see a better tie between the stories of Mary/Simon and Gordon (if there even should be one), as well as why the wannabe lawyer character has such a fascination with the tapes. And, yeah, that JIF jar seemed a little out of place, and it does seem to meander a bit. Perhaps another viewing would tie some of the loose ends together. I would agree that the mental hospital shoot location is the great subtle character of the film and enhances it. It's dirty, ugly and ominous...like the film.

I have seen a zillion horror movies in my lifetime, and most suck, particularly the newer ones that rely on CGI to blast the viewer. I'm a fan of the older stuff like "The Haunting" that rely on acting and atmosphere to create the sense of dread and horror. This one is more old school and appeals to me in that way. It's not the best of the genre, but it's much more towards the top than the bottom.

For the horror movie buff, do watch this one. It will get your attention, make you uncomfortable, and force you to figure things out yourself.