I need to come up with a title for my October horror movie extravaganza, like how AMC (back when they still showed old movies) always had "MonsterVision" every Halloween. I'll see if I can think of something before the end of the month.
I hadn't intended to start in with the horror movies this quickly, but after mentioning them at the the end of my last entry I got in the mood. So, with an entire evening to myself (the wife really does not like horror movies), and a awesome pumpkin ale to get me in the mood (Heavy Seas "Great Pumpkin" imperial pumpkin ale), I decided to jump right in. I went for a mix of different horror genres to kick things off, so we have an '80s slasher film, a classic black & white atmospheric cult film, a Hammer Horror classic, and finally a selection from the most famous Italian horror director, Dario Argento.
The House on Sorority Row (1983)
This film has apparently attained cult classic status among slasher film fans (according to IMDB, Quentin Tarantino selected it for his very first film fest in 1996). While not a great example of that type of film, it does have a few things that set it apart from most. First, the victims are not just innocent people caught up in a terrible situation (such as the camp counselors in Friday the 13th) . The members of the sorority play a prank on an old woman (who admittedly deserved it) that goes awry and they leave her for dead. Second, the film doesn't follow the "If you have sex, you die" rule that almost every slasher film since the original Halloween swears by. Lastly, the final sequence was well crafted - I honestly did not see where the killer was hidden amongst all the clown/harlequin effects (and having the killer dressed as a jester clown added a good bit of creepiness that the killer was lacking from his few appearances throughout the movie). While the movie really wasn't scary, it also avoided trying to scare you with any "false" scares (another thing that sets it apart from other slasher flicks), which is always appreciated.
Carnival of Souls (1962)
While there are certain films that I watch every year during my marathon (I always watch the original Halloween during my all-day, end of month viewing, for example), I try and make sure that the films I select are ones that I have not seen (unless there is something I am in the mood to re-watch). It wasn't until about a 3rd of the way through Carnival of Souls that I realized I had already seen it (in fact, I am pretty sure I watched it during my Halloween day marathon a few years ago). Luckily for me, it was a movie that I really enjoyed (if I would have wasted my time on a crappy movie I had previously viewed, I would have been pissed). Carnival is a low budget film, but it is a great example of how not to let a lack of money hinder the quality of the film. Rather than employ make-up and effects that scream bargain basement, this film uses low key make-up and haunting organ music for the ghouls that are terrorizing the main character. Organ music can be a cliche that is over used in older horror films, but in this one it fits. The female lead is an organ player for a church, so carrying over the music she plays as part of her job to scenes away from the church works nicely as a way to ratchet up the tension. Church organist Mary is involved in a car accident at the beginning of the film that send her vehicle off a bridge into the water. She survives, but is afterward haunted by visions of a ghastly creature with an appearance similar to a scary version of Beetlejuice (this is not a knock - the ghoul is decidedly creepy). This film is a case where the fact that it was shot in black & white is an advantage - color would only have shown emphasize the low budget instead of being hidden by the b&w. The ending sequence with a literal "Dance of the Dead" leading to the climax was very well done and a pre-cursor to the ball room scenes in The Shining. Definitely recommended for fans of classic horror.
Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972)
This is the 7th sequel from Hammer Studios to their 1958 remake of Dracula. For fans of classic horror films, you can break the great films as having come from one of 3 eras: The original Universal Pictures era of Lugosi and Karloff (1930-1939), the second Universal Pictures era of Lon Chaney, Jr. and other monster features, like the Creature from the Black Lagoon (1941-1956), and the Hammer Studios era that resurrected Dracula, Frankenstein and the Mummy for a new generation of fans (1954-1974). Many of the Hammer films featured Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing (especially in the Dracula films, where Lee was Dracula and Cushing portrayed whatever member of the Van Helsing family was required for the plot). Both actors brought excellent performances to whatever role they were tackling, and helped establish Hammer as the premiere horror studio of their time.
Since this was the 7th sequel to their Dracula film - also known as Horror of Dracula (which was almost the film that occupied this spot until, 5 minutes in, I realized I had already seen it during a previous Halloween fest. How the heck did I keep track of what films I have seen before I had Netflix to rate them?) - I should have realized that this one would not hold up to the quality and fame of most Hammer pictures (I only watched this one instead of the earlier sequels because the others were not available on Netflix online). As you could tell from the title, this was an attempt to movie their Dracula series to modern times. The movie kicks off with a "swinging" London party that reminded me of a cross between Austin Powers and an episode of The Monkees - not the type of imagery you want to invoke in a horror film. It was an off choice to start off with a scene that was so silly, when the tone of the movie shifts to horror right after that and never shifts back. Another odd choice was to reduce the screen time for Dracula himself (although, as usual, Lee makes the most of what time he does have). There was way too much time spent on his acolyte, Johnny Alucard, and his plot to resurrect Dracula.
Overall, this film comes off as more cheesy than scary, and I would recommend checking out the original and the earlier sequels than jumping right to this one as I did (fortunately, TCM ran a few of them Friday night, so I DVR'd and will be watching them as the month goes on).
Opera (1987)
Opera is the 3rd film by Italian horror master Dario Argento that I have seen (it was his 11th film as a director overall). The 2 previous films - Suspira and Inferno - were both classic examples of Italian horror. They were creepy, atmospheric, scary films where Argento used music, lighting and distinctly European scenery to create a sense of terror around every corner. Based on those previous films, I was really looking forward to this movie. Unfortunately, this was the first major disappointment of the 2010 film fest (while Dracula A.D. 1972 was disappointing, I had already prepared myself for that fact due to how far along in the series it came).
This is a tremendously uneven film. There are definitely things I like about it - the way the killer forces them main character Betty to watch his killings is inspired; the chase through Betty's apartment and AC ducts was decidedly tense. However, these are completely outweighed by what I didn't like. First, the soundtrack. The main character is an opera singer and most of the plot revolves around an opera. As a consequence, most of the soundtrack is opera. That was fine - I like the use of opera in horror films. I think it helps create a creepy atmosphere of ancient evil. However, every so often, in scenes away from the opera house, Argento used some incredibly cheesy hair metal that was very distracting, and took me out of the film every time it was on. I have no problem when watching older movies that use (now completely out of date) contemporary music in the soundtrack, as long as it is used in the whole film, which allows it to become part of the film. In this case, it was so jarring compared to the rest of the soundtrack that it was all I could think of when it was playing.
The other major fault of this film was the utter stupidity displayed by most of the characters. In most horror films, you expect a little stupidity from the characters in order to make the plot move along (its pretty much a necessity to make horror work). However, there was none of that exhibited in the 2 earlier Argento films that I watched, so it was a let down and came off as really lazy.
No comments:
Post a Comment