Alice, Sweet Alice aka Communion aka Holy Terror (1976)

directed by alfred sole
harristown funding/allied artists

This is a weird one, the kind of movie they really don’t make anymore. Kind of an American giallo, it also pays homage in a way to Don’t Look Back by Nicolas Roeg, complete with the signature rain slicker. (I have never seen Don’t Look Back, but am well aware of its tropes.) A familial study in more than one way – WHAT is her sister’s problem? WHERE is daddy? – the fun really begins when Brooke Shields is murdered during her First Holy Communion (oh, all right, the character she plays is). So what’s up with that priest, anyway? The SHOCKING reveal in this one mostly works, especially because at least one important ambiguity remains unexplained; also, some of the criminal acts in the film seem to arise mainly from malevolence or ill nature, not particularly to further serve the plot. There’s even a John Waters aspect to parts of this feature. Creepy and effective.

why did i watch this movie?

You know, I’m not entirely certain. I had come across the name several times while reading horror film histories, I know that. (“Alice, Sweet Alice,” that is, neither of the other two.)

should you watch this movie?

It’s a bit dated, to be sure, and I wouldn’t necessarily put it at the top of the “To See” list, but it is worth viewing.

highlight and low point

The varied acting performances on display are all well-accomplished, although more than one character occasionally seems too broadly drawn. The Roman Catholic focus may also throw some.

rating from outer space: B

The Mutilator (1985)

directed by buddy cooper and john s. douglass
OK productions

More or less what the previously discussed Nightmare/Blood Harvest probably imagines itself to be, this little pic has most of what you want from a kill-crazy 1980s indie feature: actors you’ll never see again, no attempt to hide the killer’s identity from the audience, an offbeat attitude, a rockin’ homemade theme song, and imaginative death scenes. What do I mean by “offbeat” approach, you’d like to know. The theme song I mentioned is “Fall Break,” the original working title for the film. Think about that for a second, while considering that the majority of the action takes place in or around a beachside bungalow. The characters are of a similar bent – they’re caricatured but not generic – and the humorous elements remain subtle and never overwhelm, despite the fact that the entire plot setup is basically absurd. Even that fact is treated with a shrug of acknowledgement. Mutilator sets a reliable template for a successful slasher film, one which was rarely followed so well without becoming repetitious in the countless ensuing rehashes.

why did i watch this movie?

As one among hundreds (or more!) of ’80s-era slasher flicks I’d neither seen nor knew existed, I was lured in by not only the impressive title characterization but the premise: kid accidentally kills his mother while cleaning his dad’s gun; mayhem ensues.

should you watch this movie?

Operating under the premise that you enjoy ’80s-era slasher flicks, I think you’d embrace this exemplar of the genre’s charms.

highlight and low point

The fact that this film doesn’t take itself too seriously while not descending into farcical idiocy is what really recommends it, in my opinion. Who dies when is predictable, as is the climax, but that’s what eventually begat metahorror, after all.

rating from outer space: a-

Terror Train (1980)

directed by roger spottiswoode
astral bellevue pathé ltd

Much, much better than it has any right to be, this often forgotten gem features terror, on a train. Said titular vehicle is carrying a New Year’s Eve party of medical students, some with a shady tragedy in their past. Also David Copperfield, the magician. And also a terrific character actor performance by Ben Johnson in his role as the train’s engineer; and also Jamie Lee Curtis in her fifth scream queen role; and also a fairly transparent exposition for the identity of the evil perpetrator, albeit with plenty of questions and suspicion for everyone. Basically, this is a classic ’80s-type slasher without any of the cliché … okay, without most of it. A good one.

why did i watch this movie?

You don’t really think I would pass up a flick called “Terror Train,” right? The presence of early career Jamie Lee Curtis in the cast helped, as that’s a reliable indicator of a certain je ne sais quoi. The inclusion of David Copperfield, the magician, cemented it for me, though. “THIS I gotta see,” I realized.

should you watch this movie?

A slasher pic released as the 1980s dawned with its manifold promises … ah, to once more stand at the threshold of such burgeoning opportunities for human endeavor.

highlight and low point

Really, the filmmakers do a pretty good job with the confined territory available, and the presence of an illusionist is a clever touch, as it presents multiple layers of uncertainty. The downside is a touch of redundancy in a few scenes.

Rating from outer space: a-

Blood Harvest aka Nightmare (1987)

directed by bill rebane
titan international

The type of independently made film of which one assesses the various costs the filmmakers must have incurred and wonders why they bothered, Nightmare (imaginative title, no?) boasts cultural oddity Tiny Tim as an apparently disturbed clown, and his irritating performance may well be the film’s highlight. With almost no cast – five or six characters – and a likewise limited storyline, it does not take long to figure out the SHOCKING identity of the Killer, and not even the Bloody Death scenes are any good, containing as they do no frights, no scares, and little gore. It is seriously hard to understand why this movie was made when they had so little with which to work. The lead Actress is naked for large stretches of the Action for no apparent reason.

why did i watch this movie?

In all honesty, I watched this movie because it sounded absolutely terrible. Success!

Should you watch this movie?

Should you need validation of your potential to make a film of your own, the realization that you could probably do better than this could do the trick, I suppose. Those that savor terrible music also might want to tune in to hear the opening theme.

highlight and low point

Tiny Tim’s acting is better than I expected it to be, I guess, in that he may do the best job amongst the small handful of hopeful thespians present. The production values are straight from the bottom of the barrel.

rating from outer space: D

Nightmare In Blood (1978)

directed by john stanley
xeromega

Purportedly a “horror comedy,” this offering could’ve used more of either, or both. Readymade for the bygone era of the “prize movie” – or Elvira, Mistress of the Night – Nightmare mostly plays it low-key, and is made with enough panache to avoid becoming fodder for MST3K types (or RiffTrax, if we wanna be up-to-date). The major problem it has is it doesn’t offer enough scares OR laughs for either aspect to become clear; it is also held back by its limited scope. The premise – famous vampire actor is marquee guest at horror convention, and actual vampire – probably works better if expanded beyond a focus on the same small set of characters. It may have been more effective in its own era, albeit merely with cult appeal – and turns out the writer/director, John Stanley, hosted a late-nite television program called Creature Features for eight years. Well, whaddya know.

why did i watch this movie?

Another unfamiliar title, its premise held promise … though I was unaware of its aim.

should you watch this movie?

If you have fond memories of watching B-movie scares on late-nite TV, or classic horrors during lazy weekend afternoon showcases, yes, by all means. I’d also be interested in hearing how it works or doesn’t when the intentions are clear beforehand.

highlight and low point

Some of the characters and scenarios are pretty amusing – the owner of the comics shop and the talkshow debate about whether horror movies are pernicious, for two examples – but too often the line between deft hommage and inept bungling is unclear. Much could well pass for unintentional humor. Is this a terrible movie, I found myself wondering, or a knowingly winking one?

rating from outer space: c+

The Void (2016)

directed by steven kostanski and jeremy gillespie
cave painting pictures

The trailer for this movie made it look SO good that little likelihood existed for it to live up to the promise, but with that being said, The Void was still well above average. A look at one man’s experimental approach to an afterlife, wrapped in a siege flick, it disappointed me a bit in that at a certain point the threat of zombie archetypes loomed. That fate was avoided, and its metaphysical mumbo-jumbo also saved it to a degree. Certainly a suspenseful movie, I must detract a few points for evoking reminiscences of Jacob’s Ladder, and also for reminding me a bit too much of the Thomas Tessier novel Finishing Touches. It is, however, entirely possible it purposely provoked such meditations.

why did i watch this movie?

My brother texted me a link to the trailer, and I was sold.

should you watch this movie?

With the caveat that the second half didn’t deliver enough of a payoff for my tastes, yeah, I could recommend that. It is an entertaining enterprise, for sure.

highlight and low point

Suspenseful frights abound, and a high WTF factor carries the momentum. My quibbles about certain revelations along the way may be peculiar to me, but I was hoping for something a little less … fantastical, I guess.

rating from outer space: b+

The Cut aka Cadaver (2007)

directed by son tae-woong
chungeorahm m&fc

The last couple Asian horror pictures I’d tried to watch I never finished, as the Japanese one (I do not recall the title) was just too confusing and the Korean one (The Second Coming) was too low-budget for its rather standard haunting-ghost malarkey, but I decided to try this South Korean production because the premise seemed straightforward enough given the genre conventions. That premise? Medical students have to dissect a mysteriously marked female corpse, and suffer the consequences. OR DO THEY. The Cut is mostly worth the effort, though it was not as creepy or frightening or mysterious (or confusing, or repugnant) as the best of the style. Mainly it reminded me why I have enjoyed other movies of its ilk, and that I still may. Perhaps a tad mainstream in execution overall.

why did i watch this movie?

As I mentioned, I hadn’t much felt the urge to watch any Asian horror cinema lately, but the description of this one compelled me to give it a whirl.

should you watch this movie?

That depends. If you’re in the mood for a middle-of-the-road tale of vengeance (or something) from beyond the grave (maybe), it’ll suffice. If you’re looking for something more intense, however, this probably isn’t it.

highlight and low point

The SHOCKING TWIST is hinted at throughout, and the technique via which it is revealed is fairly de rigueur, but it works well enough. The also standard ambiguous ending is questionable.

rating from outer space: b

The Redeemer: Son of Satan aka Class Reunion Massacre (1978)

directed by constantine s. gochis
enterprise pictures limited

If you try, you can find the claim that this chunk of tripe was a precursor to the slasher craze or some such nonsense. What it IS is a convoluted bit of inanity that doesn’t make much sense and doesn’t really bother to try.

  1. There’s no “class reunion” as such, and it would be a stretch to call what occurs a “massacre”
  2. I don’t recall “Satan” being involved in any way
  3. Whatever “redeeming” may be in the offing is rendered somewhat inconsequential by the fact that what is happening is incomprehensible

The action comprises mainly contrived murders of characters that are sometimes difficult to identify, their relation to the story arc uncertain. Mix in a flashback here and there, intercut with a doomsday preacher, and so on and so on. Oh, and do NOT forget the supernatural (diabolical?) element. Precursor to the rise of the Slasher, or imitation giallo – your call!

why did i watch this movie?

I was expecting a class reunion massacre, perhaps with a twisted psychotic and some ’70s flair. Plus, I had never heard of it and it had an alluring title.

should you watch this movie?

If you are interested in tracing the process by which too many concepts can be combined into a movie that is both dull and silly, then I suppose so, yes.

Highlight and low point

The second or third murder (the first or second pertaining to the “reunion”) is thrillingly absurd in method or manner of death; the fact that I was not sure which character was being killed was a bonus. The last of the pertinent murders is almost equally absurd, but the identity of the character suffering it is not in question.

rating from outer space: D

Death Weekend aka The House by the Lake (1976)

directed by william fruet
cinépix film properties

One of them ol’ rape-revenge flicks, this Canadian turkey produced by Ivan Reitman boasts a rape scene that I wasn’t even convinced had happened, so effectively was it portrayed. Almost every character in this exercise in pointlessness is extremely annoying, ranging from the drunken hicks through the egocentric urbanite to the loutish, subnormal thugs. Seemingly random events meander on and on until the interminable harassment scene begins, and it’s all formulaic. The justifiable homicides, once they eventually start, more or less come out of nowhere, which is a nice touch, and some are fairly creative as well. Overall, however, if you actually for some reason watch this garbage, you’ll wonder why they bothered making it. Or if they knew.

why did i watch this movie?

That’s a good question, actually. Why DID I watch this movie? The description I read was wildly inaccurate, for one thing.

should you watch this movie?

I cannot imagine why you would want to do that.

highlight and low point

As mentioned, a few of the killings perpetrated by the heroine are kind of amusing, as is the initial establishment of her as an amply capable modern woman – especially for a MODEL, you dig. These few positives are overwhelmed by the disgraceful portrayals of the rubes and by the insufferable depictions of most of the baddies, whose incessant moronic laughter is truly grating.

rating from outer space: D

Deathwatch (2002)

directed by michael j. bassett
lions gate entertainment

More recent than the majority of the movies that will be discussed here, this offering is mainly psychological in effect, both for the characters and the audience. Set in the trenches of World War I, it very effectively conveys how miserable an experience that must have been. Besides the basic nature of trench warfare, wherein one is essentially fighting blind in claustrophobic conditions, it is cold and raining throughout almost the entire running time of the movie. This actually had a negative effect on the film’s verisimilitude, as I found myself thinking how unpleasant it must have been to act in it, thereby removing me from my immersion in its intended reality. Anyway, after a nighttime blitz, confusion ensues. By the time things get sorted out, you probably will have guessed the SHOCKING TWIST long before they get around to it onscreen. A pleasant surprise anyway, this one, as i just kind of stumbled across it while looking for more schlock to watch.

why did i watch this movie?

To be honest, because it sounded different from the schlock I usually watch, and also had the added novelty of being from the 21st century.

should you watch this movie?

That’s not such a bad idea – it’s probably better to see it thinking it’s a war picture or an action vehicle rather than a horror flick, though. Value added!

highlight and low point

Really, the absolutely bleak nature of the setting and environment so effectively leads the viewer toward each successive slice of despair and hopelessness that it’s an impressive accomplishment. A little predictable at times.

rating from outer space: b+