Tumbbad (2018)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by rahi anil barve with adesh prasad
sohum shah films/colour yellow productions/eros international/film i vÄst/filmgate films

This period piece spans the era when India transitioned into independence, presenting a kind of fable steeped in mythology and the dark underbelly – the womb, actually – of religion. As much a fantastical work as anything else, it’s surprising to find it took six years to complete, because it’s of a unified vision and weaves its story powerfully. I guess the best way to describe its genre would be “magical realism,” as its tale of several generations of one family’s struggle with and against a curse of sorts remains grounded in actuality while having at its core a bizarre relationship with the otherworldly. It’s engrossing throughout, captivating even, despite (or in spite of) its capricious and largely unlikable main character – a bit like There Will Be Blood, perhaps. At worst, it’s intriguing, and at its best it can be spectacular.

why did i watch this movie?

Described as a story about a goddess who created the universe and the problems that arose when people unwisely began to worship her firstborn son, who is effectively exiled and imprisoned, it sounded like a unique experience … and it is, even as at least part of that description isn’t altogether accurate.

should you watch this movie?

You’ll need to set aside some time, as it’s an immersive experience.

highlight and low point

I didn’t particularly care for the ending, as it doesn’t seem to hew closely enough to the depiction of the essential powers at play throughout the rest of the picture – and I like it even less now that I have learned that a sequel is planned. (Sigh.) The film looks great overall, I mean it’s visually arresting, and it carries various of its conceits to their full extent.

rating from outer space: B+

 

 

Devil Dog: The Hound of Hell (1978)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by curtis harrington
landers-roberts-zeitman productions

Man, I do NOT remember there being any made-for-TV movies like this when I was a kid – though admittedly, in 1978 my parents most likely would not have let me stay up late enough even on Halloween night, when this aired. (They weren’t that restrictive on content, for the most part, although how they would have felt about a possessed dog is anybody’s guess.) For such an offbeat premise, unfortunately, the product can be a little underwhelming. True, I didn’t expect the main character to wind up going to Quito, Ecuador, to consult a shaman in order to defeat the Barghest his family’s unwittingly adopted, because why would anyone mix up their various mythologies that way. Ultimately, the picture is saved by suchlike casual idiocy, managing to be thoroughly entertaining despite its limitations.

why did i watch this movie?

The power of Zoltan compelled me.

should you watch this movie?

You know, I’ve often thought of the made-for-TV horror picture as kind of a lesser creation, figuring it couldn’t possibly compete with its large-screen brethren and sistren, but it turns out this isn’t always the case.


highlight and low point

“It’s a monstrous thing, a goblin dog,” the occult bookseller tells Richard Crenna’s Mike Barry – “A man … hounded by his dog,” as he described himself to her with an abashed chuckle – and boy, she ain’t kidding.

The climactic and climatic final battle between Mike and Lucky the hellhound is a marvel of multiple-exposure imagery, and the portrayals of Betty, Bonnie and Charlie Barry as they slip toward infernal fealty are quite amusing. Unfortunately, we aren’t treated to nearly enough Satanic goings-on, especially given the promising opening.


rating from outer space: c−

The Dark Side of the Moon aka Parasite (1990)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by d.J. webster
wildstreet pictures

If you had, like, a minimal straight-to-video budget, one might wonder why “space epic” would be the kind of production you’d attempt. Music video director D.J. Webster ignored these constraints and the results are visually reminiscent of John Carpenter’s debut Dark Star, along with the inspired stagecraft of Plan 9 From Outer Space. This ripoff mashup of Star Trek: Voyager, 2001, The Thing, Aliens et cetera also features shots cribbed directly from Star Wars and some acting laughable enough to compete with the output of its costume department. I haven’t even mentioned the questionable theory advanced, which somehow links “Centrus B-40” (the title location) with the Bermuda Triangle – I’m not an astrophysicist, but that seems dubious to me. It does, however, set up a pretty great ending to this otherwise turgid melodrama. Oh, and lest I forget, Satan.

why did i watch this movie?

The search for ’90s fodder led me here, with the bonus that this picture was completely unknown to me.

should you watch this movie?

Though I have no idea why you’d want to try, one note of interest may be that this script is by Chad and Carey Hayes, who eventually would write The Conjuring, among many other credits. (So, kids, if at first you don’t succeed … )

highlight and low point

For starters, the captain of the spacecraft smokes a lot of cigarettes, and sports a leather baseball cap. The onboard computer is a female … android, I guess, which for some reason is dressed like this:

It’s set in 2022, and its dialogue includes the statement “It looks like the Shuttle … Discovery … from the old NASA probe,” answered with the observation that “NASA hasn’t been flying for 30 years.” And then there’s this graphic:

rating from outer space: d+

 

Don’t Go in the Woods aka Don’t Go in the Woods … Alone! (1981)

/ billy peppers / 1 Comment
directed by james bryan
jbf

This picture is almost breathtakingly incompetent. It features possibly the most ersatz blood I have ever seen, its soundtrack is a wildly inappropriate symphony of treated electronic squawks and bleeps – and it is also a vivid reminder of a time when independent horror features could carve out their own niche at the nation’s “nabes” and drive-ins. As such, despite its excessive documentary-style nature shots, unnecessary scenes, continuity problems, clearly overdubbed dialogue, utterly superfluous moments, endless stream of unidentified cast members, and overly linear “plot,” this flick demands a place at the cult-classic table with the likes of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Midnight movie weekends should definitely feature people screaming nonsensical audience-participation crap at this epic.


why did i watch this movie?

I don’t know about you, but I’m almost always up for a film with a title warning “DON’T GO IN” this, “DON’T GO NEAR” that, and so forth.

should you watch this movie?

If you had a venue where you could screen this as part of some event or other, or project it as a sideline feature or during an interlude or something, it would probably go over pretty well. Otherwise?

No.

highlight and low point

The best part of this adventure, hands down, is the incredible scenery of the beautiful location in which they filmed, which may be Wasatch-Cache National Forest.

This isn’t even one of the good shots

Whatever it is, I wanna go there, even if it’s inhabited by a deranged mountain man or any survivors of related massacres. Honestly, though, I also enjoyed the completely unpretentious portrayals of the members of the sheriff’s department. Managing to stand out even in a completely haphazard production, the bewildering parade of random characters is sui generis.

rating from outer space: D+

미확인 동영상: 절대클릭금지 aka Mihwakin Donghyeongsang aka Don’t Click (2012)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by kim tae-kyung
ad406 pictures

Some Korean schoolgirls are obsessed with web videos … which can be deadly, would you believe. Well, one might be, anyway. Or is it only one? And what kind of recording IS it, anyway? (Answer: it’s an “incantation.”) Basically a no-bullying PSA in the form of a horror flick, this production succeeds for two reasons: One, its viral element spreads to a plainly alarming degree via conduits that you wouldn’t have suspected, and two, I watched it after viewing a couple of really bad pictures. Yes, it does have its own merits, and I also enjoyed the somewhat peculiar English translations in the subtitles on more than one version of this film, but it’s not terribly different in tone, effect or affect from some of the other flicks that have probably come to mind via this synopsis. Kang Byul does make for one hell of a scream queen playing Jung-Mi, who’s more or less the cause of all the trouble.

why did i watch this movie?

Looking for some other pic led me to this one, but I cannot recall the exact pathway.

should you watch this movie?

It’s nothing too special, ultimately, nor particularly memorable. I guess one could highlight its quirkiness as a selling point.

highlight and low point

The complexity of the layers of guilt and levels of involvement among the major players in this drama are a bit of a curveball, and elements of subtle humor plus a degree of edginess are also a bit uncommon – or at least were unexpected by this reviewer. A few of the story’s supporting aspects are underdeveloped, though, almost as if to acknowledge that while necessary to provide a foundation for the happenings, they weren’t a primary concern of the creative staff.

rating from outer space: C

Spellcaster (1991)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by rafal zielinski
empire pictures/taryn productions, inc.

I don’t know if you have any idea who Richard Blade is or was, and any way I could try to explain it seems as though it would be impossible to understand, so let’s just say he was a “New Wave” media personality, a Briton based in L.A., and leave it at that. In some of his earliest scenes in this movie, he’s wearing a shirt with his own name on it.

I don’t know if you have any idea who Adam Ant is or was, but to me, it makes perfect sense that he’s in this movie with Richard Blade, though they have no scenes together.

This movie actually was made in 1988, but it seems culturally anachronistic even so. Adam Ant had no cultural cachet in 1988, and for that matter, “New Wave” was itself long dead.

Oh, the flick? It’s some sorta quasi-fantasy tale of a “Rock TV” contest set in a castle in Italy. Two of the characters hail from Cleveland.

why did i watch this movie?

Again, this blog is lacking in ’90s content, and while I was seeking to correct that I came across this title, which I gladly would have ignored save for the casting.

should you watch this movie?

This picture was dumped onto the VHS market three years after it was made.

highlight and low point

I got a big kick out of mismatched Italian “CHiPs” here, if that counts:

I think this film was intended to be some kinda FX showcase, what with the theme of diabolical magic, but that doesn’t really work out so well.

Also, for a production that kinda emulates a fable, there’s no moral: nobody wins or loses, not even the outfoxed Count Diablo or whatever the hell his name is.

rating from outer space: d

Dracula’s Dog aka Zoltan, Hound of Dracula aka El perro de Satán (1977)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by albert band
vic cinema productions

So, “Dracula” as the world knows him doesn’t really appear in this movie – but an “Igor Dracula” does, along with one last descendant, a modern family man named “Michael Drake.” The story, such as it is, is a cockamamie concoction about a canine that I. Dracula long ago enlisted for some reason or another, along with its former owner – this picture’s Renfield, essentially – a quasi-vampire that can wander around in the daylight to do his bidding. Here, having been revived and in need of a master, these servants want to deliver M. Drake to his legacy. (Did you know that if you remove the stake from the heart of a vampire or near-vampire in its coffin, it comes back to, uh, “life”? I didn’t.) I cannot possibly convince you how preposterous this film is. I would like to point out, however, that relying on dogs to be your lead actors is not the world’s greatest idea.


why did i watch this movie?

A “Dracula” flick without Dracula, but with his … dog …

should you watch this movie?

It will certainly make you laugh – though it’s debatable what kind of laughter it will provoke – but unless you really want to see how NOT to make a movie, it’s not worth it.

highlight and low point

I did mention that this pic relies on dogs to carry a lot of the action, right? Zoltan himself dismantles the roof of a cabin at one point while his comrades compromise the walls. The overdubbed dog noises are also pretty special – barking, howling, growling, you name it. Nothing, however, tops the experience of repeated shots of loyal servant “Smit” staring idiotically into the camera while a voiceover intones “ZOLTAN.”
The family RV interlude comes close, though.

rating from outer space: n⁄a

adorable vampire puppy!

Nightshift (2018)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
written & directed by stephen hall
greenflash pictures/blue shadows films/grump films

Maybe a little over halfway through the 75 or so minutes of this production, it veers into a psychologically tormenting sequence that elevates what already had been an interesting picture into a compelling one. The effect isn’t really sustained, but nonetheless this is one film that understands the dynamics of parceling out its particulars. Often, the moments in between events carry the most weight in this tale of weird happenings in an Irish hotel. At times more than a little reminiscent of 1408, for at least one example, what works best here is that nothing ever seems too surreal to accept. Not exactly unpredictable, this presentation of a truly terrible first shift at a new job still manages to defy the norm to some degree, although that mostly may be a matter of style rather than substance. Whatever the case, the end result is another effective exhibition from Ireland.

why did i watch this movie?

The description didn’t exactly dazzle me, but something about it made the flick seem worth a look. Maybe it was the Irish thing; as noted, I generally seem to enjoy output from those shores.

should you watch this movie?

While acknowledging there’s only so much one can do with the whole place-where-something-terrible-happened angle, this one at least tweaks it a bit.

highlight and low point

I cannot stress enough that I was greatly impressed by how much this flick does with its scenes where nothing actually winds up happening. The aura and suspense generated in those scenes is masterful. Also, during the mind- and time-bending sequence, a few instances work wonders for the picture’s chill factor. As for the downside, surprise isn’t notably in abundance here, despite the fact that it avoids becoming overly formulaic.

rating from outer space: B

The Basement (2017)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by laszlo illes
intergalactic productions/pannonia pictures

Stop me if you think that you’ve heard this one before – a group of friends is harassed and stalked by masked assailants in a confined location, and it might be supernatural in nature. All right, that’s a little bit unfair to this flick mostly situated under the streets of Budapest, because the group are the intruders, even if the entrance to THE BASEMENT was open, so … Atmospheric, on occasion aptly frightful, verging on ominous, this generically likable picture never really overcomes its setup, even if it does expand the parameters a bit. For instance, the members of the group never really agree with each other about what it is they may be facing. Their shared confusion is welcome, as is the fact that one of the characters keeps telling the others they’re being stupid. Also, though one gets the sense that the script may not be playing totally fair, it doesn’t egregiously break the rules, either, always leaving just enough room for doubt. That, however, doesn’t quite suffice, and it never becomes really gripping. It also shares its name with an American film made the same year that doesn’t sound much more inventive.

why did i watch this movie?

It’s Hungarian. I do not think I’d seen a Hungarian film since Béla Tarr and Ágnes Hranitzky’s Werckmeister Harmonies … a long time ago. (I think that’s the one that sums up 2.5 hours of misery with the observation “Nothing means anything.”)

should you watch this movie?

“There is no there there.”

highlight and low point

Most of this picture is in English, and though supposedly subtitled, did not translate the random Hungarian dialogue – an intriguing touch. The comically blatant “Vitamin Water” product placement worsts the contorted attempt to avoid revealing the film’s core banality too soon.

rating from outer space: C

 

 

The Runestone (1991)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by willard carroll
hyperion pictures/signature communications

The rare piece of schlock horror whose major problem may be too much ambition, this farcical saga of a Viking werewolf wreaking havoc in the Art world of Manhattan – while being tracked by not only a dogged police detective but an archaeologist – is often sidetracked by vignettes of Alexander Godunov grimly portraying some sort of watchmaker. These sketches may be dream sequences related to a teenage boy’s legacy, which may never materialize, but it’s hard to tell. See what I mean? Oh, and at a certain point I realized it was maybe supposed to be a comedy. This is never a good sign, when the filmmaker’s intentions are that unclear. Really, as the action continued to spiral further out there, I began to wonder if I had just missed some important tells in the beginning stages. That’s definitely possible, as it certainly wouldn’t be the first time, but it points to the clumsy nature of the flick’s construction, and circles back to that aforementioned problem of overreach.

why did i watch this movie?

I noticed that this blog is severely deficient in movies from the 1990s, and this is the first title I happened upon that seemed to fit the modus operandi around here.

should you watch this movie?

While it has its charms, it doesn’t deliver enough for even its straight-to-VHS realm.


highlight and low point

A bunch of sight gags and deliberately cheesy shots dominate the latter half of the picture, and the interplay between the police and the archaeologist and the artist and the teenager and … where was I going with this. (See what I mean?) Old hands Peter Riegert and Laurence Tierney do the standard cop shtick, and the burlesque of the Art scene is pretty tired.

rating from outer space: D+

yes, i laughed