Change Your Image
jeanspillane
Reviews
The Sadist (1963)
Scorching Nihilism.
I have to say, I was a little worried that after all the great things I had heard about "The Sadist" that I would be let down in the end. After all, its an early sixties cheapie thriller starring Arch Hall Jr. and its probably just overrated for its bleak attitude which is so uncommon in films of that era. Right?
Wrong.
The plot is simple but strong. Three teachers on the way to an L.A. Dodgers game have car trouble and pull into a house/car garage on the side of the road. They search for help but the place seems to be abandoned... However there is warm pie and uneaten food on the kitchen table of the house. Something is definitely amiss and all three teachers are feeling somewhat uncomfortable when suddenly the find out they aren't so alone after all... A cackling Charlie Tibb (Arch Hall Jr.) and his twisted lolita of a girlfriend (Marilyn Manning) creep out of the graveyard of abandoned cars and take the situation into their control...
"The Sadist" is truly a great movie. Arch Hall Jr. gives us one of cinema's greatest maniacs, some one on par with the likes of Anthony Perkin's Norman Bates or Klaus Kinski's Don Lope de Aguirre. Never for a moment did I find Charles A. Tibb to be unbelievable. Marilyn Manning is equally strong as Charlie's child-like girlfriend Judy, seemingly even sicker then Charles. She whispers deranged activities in his ear and giggles constantly and in the end I found her to be the more disturbing of the duo. The three teachers are not quite as strong, Helen Hovery and Don Russel put out solid performances but unfortunately the resident "big-talker" Richard Alden gets some what obnoxious.
What is perhaps most remarkable about this film however, is the way it is shot. Vilmos Zsigmond's (here credited as William Zsigmond) camera lingers on the sweat, pain and suffering of the three teachers only to cut to a playful and giggling couple of psycho's happily sipping their Coca-Cola's. The whole film is filled with a feeling of heat and agony, a constantly blazing sun shining down into a barren waste land of dead cars and dead bodies. Flashes of hope are rare and always beaten down with such hatred and force that the viewer almost hopes it wont come back... One of the most high tension films I have ever seen.
While some of todays viewers may lose sight of the strength and message of this film, I believe that it is as strong as it ever was. Required viewing for any fan of low-budget thrillers, and required viewing for any one interested in just how powerful the media of film can be.
****/*****
Cat's Eye (1985)
I just wish James Woods was in all the sections.
"Cat's Eye" is one of the several Stephen King written horror anthologies, and quite likely the weakest. If you are looking for some campy thrills, there is little charm to be found with in this film, with the exception of the excellent first section.
"Quitters Inc.", the first of the three stories, is superbly acted by James Woods (but what doesn't he superbly act in?) and a pretty funny section at that. Basically, James Woods is a smoker trying to quit, and enlists the experts at Quitters Inc. to help him. Little does he know that he is getting a little more help then he bargained for... All and all a decent segment, it does fall a little flat in the shock department. If they had taken things farther (and I mean much farther), this would have been a really great and memorable section. As it is though, it is merely good King/Woods entertainment, but that ain't bad in it self.
The second segment, "The Ledge", is a pretty drastic drop in quality. The story is unbelievable, which is hardly a problem in a horror anthology, but it is also poorly acted and very dull, which is a major problem. Although I doubt it is much longer then either of the other segments, it seemed to drag on forever. There is no real suspense or humor, and in the end you are just glad it's over.
The final part of the film, "The General", is pretty bad but also entertaining. The obnoxious Mother is fun to get annoyed with and the troll creature is very awesome, although the blue screen scenes it is in are some of the worst I have ever seen. In fact, the special effects throughout the film are horrible and unimaginative; I enjoyed them for pure camp, but if you want any realism steer far away. A young Drew Barrymore appears and gives out a good performance as an actress, actually superior to both her parents in many ways.
The tie together story of the wandering cat is stupid and pointless, and only enjoyable if you love to watch cats. Id rather watch a real cat sleep then watch this stupid cat wander into another Stephen King short story though, so go figure.
The first segment is definitely worth watching for any Stephen King / Camp Horror / James Woods fan, and the third if you really like trolls or Drew Barrymore (they are basically the same thing). The second should be used for insomniacs or King completists only.
A star and a half out of five.
Trilogy of Terror (1975)
Karen Black delivers where the film fails to
Trilogy of Terror is a decent (but commonly overrated) anthology horror film directed by Dan Curtis (creator and producer of "Dark Shadows") and starring the great Karen Black. Although I have always enjoyed Karen Black's work, rarely have I seen her as impressive as in this film, which is primarily a showcase for her talents as an actress.
The first story of the film, "Julie", is by far the weakest entry. While well acted and directed, its dull plot of a black-mailed teacher goes no where and there isn't a chill or surprise to be found. Robert Burton gives a solid performance as the black-mailing student, but the unimpressive script gives the actors little to work with. Even Karen Black fails to impress on any level.
We move into much interesting territory in the second story, "Millicent and Therese". Even though I saw the twist coming a mile away, it was a good concept and an amazing set of performances by Karen Black. Watching her tightly move around the screen as Millicent in one scene and then seeing her seductively question George Gaynes as Dr. Ramesy in the next is a true testament to her charisma and skill as an actress. A mediocre tale is made very watch able by her performance.
The third story, "Amelia", is without a doubt the strongest of the three and the only frightening tale. Karen Black firmly places her self in the ranks as one of the strongest scream-queens of the 70s/80s with this role and it's a damn shame there aren't a few slashers in those eras with her playing the lead role. She frantically runs and screams around her apartment after an effective build up. While merely a "killer doll" story, it is a very well done one with a creepy looking (but funny sounding) doll. Despite a small amount of unintentional humor, there are some very solid chills to be found in this section.
While a little bit of a let-down for me, I did enjoy tales of terror and there are far worse ways to spend an evening. The first tale is boring, but the second picks up and the third is an excellent closing piece. Not the best anthology horror film, as some would have you believe, but definitely worth seeing of Karen Black's performance.
** / *****
Zombi 2 (1979)
Everybody Loves Zombies
Zombie (or Zombi 2) is an excellent entry into the genre, and a beloved cult classic of Italian horror. For me, its very easy to see why; Zombie has pretty much everything you'd expect, want, or need from a film about zombies. Its got excellent atmosphere, kick ass zombie make up, a brooding pace, a goofy-yet-ominous score, shoddy to mediocre acting and just enough gore to please all those people who will rent it for the rotting corpse on the cover (you know who you are). Oh, and it has a nude-except-for-thin-white-panties scuba diving scene, if that stuff interests anyone (again... you know who you are.)
Zombie doesn't weigh itself down with plot. Girl's father is missing, friendly reporter helps her go to a distant and mysterious island and search for him. Zombies are there, fun ensues. This is not a zombie film with social undertones like Romero's Dead Trilogy, this is just an out and out Zombie flick and it happily admits it. Its clear pretty quickly that there isn't a deeper meaning... But do Zombies really need deeper meaning?
The answer, of course, is no. One thing that surprised me was how much I hear people complain of this film moving too slow and being boring except for the opening and finale. I disagree with this view very strongly. It seems that people have forgotten (or maybe never knew) the great horror films of the past. Lightning paced horror films most certainly have their place, but never really in zombie flicks. Was Night of the Living Dead a rapid paced adventure with like-able characters? Would todays average teenager enjoy sitting through a classic like "White Zombie"? Hell no! A Zombie film should move like a zombie. Slow, dreadful, inescapable and ominous. Look at films like "Resident Evil" or the trailer for the upcoming remake of the classic "Dawn of the Dead". Ruined, just as slashers were, by the new "MTV" school of horror. Zombie is a smoothly paced film from start to finish, with excellent builds in tension. Plus yes, the ending kicks ass.
In short, this definitely is not a film for every one. Not even for all horror fans. If you've tasted Italian horror and want more, this is a worthy film to continue in. If you saw an different Italian zombie/horror film and were bored to tears, save your self the time and go rent a quicker paced American film from the same time period.
No, it is not as good as Night. No, It is not as good as Dawn. Still, Zombie is a classic that stands in its own right, and will be handed down from generation to generation of horror fans for years to come as such.
7/10
Bride of Re-Animator (1990)
Underrated Follow-Up
I did not start watching this with the highest of expectations. I am sure that many of you did not/will not as well. There were two main reasons for me:
1. Its a sequel
Generally, sequels are a bad re-hash of the first, or some misguided attempt to bring the story and characters to a new setting. This movie is neither, instead we get a (semi) natural continuation of the first film, which attempts to slip in more of the original Lovecraft Novella, which ultimately, neither film lives up to. Sure, characters that had little to no hope for life return with out a bat of the camera's eye, but this is a horror-comedy people, not The Godfather: Part II type of sequel, and I'm willing to ignore this to an extent. it never got on my nerves, anyway. Escapes the "horror movie sequel trap" quite well.
2. Bad Reviews
For some reason, this has terrible reviews most places, while the first film is praised and given **** and ***** star ratings, this puppy is tossed into the "worth a rental for genre fans" bin, with nothing above a ** rating in any professional reviewers opinion. This is really a shame, although I do admit, if you are not a fan of the first film you probably may as well skip this one. I also strongly recommend that those of you who have not seen Re-Animator backtrack and watch it first, as it definitely would (or maybe I should say "should") heighten your enjoyment level of this film.
Bride of Re-Animator is an excellent chunk of horror-comedy, which gets over looked when standing next to its beefy pappy. Personally, I found that elements of the film surpassed the first, atmosphere and gore f/x being the most clear ones. I really have to hand it to the f/x design team, because this is currently one of my favorite horror films as far as "creatures". The many experiments highlight the film when ever they appear, and the Bride herself is an excellent piece of gore design.
As far as the atmosphere goes, it is surely darker then its predecessor in this respect. Perhaps only the climax of the film truly shows the best aspects, as for the most part it reflects a similar attitude to Re-Animator, if slightly watered down. However, at the end we are treated to multi-colored lighting, fantastic zombies, smoke and some well used gauze, used to invoke the dress of the Bride in Bride of Frankenstein. Not to mention the earlier stated creature effects.
At any rate, this is a very worthy follow-up to a horror classic. Perhaps the script is not as strong, the quotable lines fewer and farer between and supporting characters more forgettable. But admit at least, nay-sayers, that if nothing else you loved it when Dr. West yelled "My God! They're using tools!"
7/10