police cops

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by george a. romero
image ten

This being one of the more influential and critically assessed horror flicks of all time, I’m not going to waste a whole lot of words here, though I do find it highly amusing that I’d never seen this picture. (I’ve seen Dawn of the Dead, the completely irrelevant Return of the Living Dead, and such variants as Zombi3, but never the foundation film.) Having previously watched Romero’s Season of the Witch (“aka Hungry Wives”) and The Crazies, I wasn’t completely unfamiliar with his work, but I wasn’t prepared for the early going of this picture to emulate a silent movie, nor the workaday nature of the living dead themselves. The social commentary can be a bit heavy-handed, but that’s kind of a Romero calling card, at least in his auteur guise. A few quibbles: One, the film lacks for a certain logical consistency in how the zombies – er, I mean “ghouls” – act; two, and this just occurred to me during the latter portions of this film, why in the hell do zombies have to eat? They’re dead!

why did i watch this movie?

Night of the Living Dead is no. four in Johnny Ramone’s top 10.

should you watch this movie?

So much depends upon a red wheel barrow glazed with rain water beside the white chickens.

highlight and low point

The very nature of the low-budget presentation aids it immeasurably, lending it an almost documentary feel at times, and the general lack of histrionics on behalf of the risen dead also helps, their implacable multitudes generating an overwhelming sense of dread as the scope of the danger becomes more clear. Romero’s unadorned direction of his actors at times gives the proceedings a distinctly stagy quality, and his statements tend toward the transparent.

rating from outer space: a-

Christmas Evil aka You Better Watch Out (1980)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
written and Directed by lewis jackson
edward r. pressman productions

One thing I hadn’t expected from this movie (or, to be fair, any movie) was to see Santa Claus being chased by an angry mob bearing torches. As for that horde, it was as though the townspeople were suspiciously well prepared for such a situation. An opportunistic rabble, however, is just one small oddity in a film chock-full of strange events and ideas. Befitting the Yuletide theme, the picture plays out like some sort of twisted fable. A repressed middle-aged man identifies a little too much with Saint Nicholas, his obsession seemingly brought about by a desire for Santa to be real. Of course, he works in a toy factory. He also spies on the neighborhood kids, and his brother’s family, but this may be expected since his pathology was borne of a bit of childhood voyeurism. His Claus then becomes a sort of Robin Hood, sabotaging the company at which he’s become middle management and killing a couple people in the process. The saga ends with an impossible scene paralleled four years later in Repo Man, would you believe:

why did i watch this movie?

It was Christmas Eve, and I’d just watched the Silent Night flicks the preceding two evenings.

should you watch this movie?

It perverts the iconography a bit, sure, but it essentially reinforces classic holiday-movie themes. Get the whole family together!

highlight and low point

A scene where our protagonist gets pulled into a neighborhood Christmas party and dances with the attendees is pretty interesting, particularly as at this point, he should be on the lam. Luckily for him, it appears to be surprisingly hard to follow the trail of a guy dressed as Santa Claus driving around in a big white van with a garish sleigh painted on both sides.

rating from outer space: B+

Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by charles e. sellier, jr.
slayride, inc.

Okay, cancel your bets and shelve your arguments, because this is officially the greatest Christmas movie ever made. Notorious for its long career of being protested, reviled, censored and blackballed, this picture hardly deserved the denigration. So what if it portrays a murderous Santa who shoots dad and cuts mom’s throat after ripping her blouse open on the side of the road, in full view of one of her kids, after having already killed a store clerk, and why get all hot and bothered that one of those orphaned kids who witnessed the highway carnage grows up to be so traumatized by the very idea of old Saint Nick that he embarks on a Christmas Eve killing spree highlighted by impaling a topless Linnea Quigley on a stag’s head in her living room before gifting her little sister a boxcutter and leaving her with the mess? Man, people are sensitive sometimes. Ironically enough, the parental complaints lodged against the film upon its original release were that their little moppets would be traumatized by such a depiction of K. Kringle … which is, not to put too fine a point on it, exactly what the movie depicts.

why did i watch this movie?

Why did I wait so long? I remember admiring the box for this classic back in the good old days at the neighborhood video rental (which was actually the storefront of the TV repair shop).

should you watch this movie?

highlight and low point

Well, I guess Lilyan Chauvin’s portrayal of the orphanage’s humorless Mother Superior is a bit much, but why niggle. Robert Brian Wilson’s turn as confused, deranged Billy – kudos to the writers for their sagacious choice of names – is nearly perfect. The flick’s nerve, daring, gall, chutzpah – whichever you prefer – confers it its panache.

rating from outer space: a−

Silent Night, Bloody Night aka Night of the Dark Full Moon aka Death House aka Deathouse (1972)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by theodore gershuny
cannon films/jeffrey konvitz productions/armor films inc.

Mainly filmed in 1970 but not finished or released until 1972, this poorly constructed, many-titled movie shows the strain of its uncertain, prolonged creation. The editing is particularly touch-and-go, as scenes hopscotch abruptly. Plus, early on, plentiful stills and freeze-frame shots dominate, sorta like in a Ken Burns documentary. Eventually the production commences with typical cinematic techniques and practices, but at a critical later juncture turns sepia tone, and subsequently seems to attempt an approach on German Expressionist territory. These latter changes are in service of flashbacks explaining the story, because someone must have realize it wasn’t coherent. Despite that, one of the characters still has to drop more knowledge on the audience more or less out of the blue. The opening and closing scenes appear to have been shot separately from the rest of the picture and appended later, and although their narration also is meant to help tie things together, it doesn’t.

why did i watch this picture?

It’s Christmas season, and the events of this film occur on Christmas Eve, as did a supposedly pivotal event 20 years earlier. (The only evidence of this is occasional background music.)

Should you watch this movie?

I cannot in good faith recommend that course of action.

highlight and low point

Even when crucial plot points are revealed, some of them still don’t make a whole lot of sense. For instance, the fact that the owner of the house around which the film is centered turned it into a mental hospital at some point, then freed the patients – blaming them for mayhem that ensued – and then spent most of the next 20 years living in a mental hospital himself, apparently by choice. Actually, that’s the linchpin of this whole muddle. Now you don’t have to watch it!

rating from outer space: D+

The Power (1984)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by jeffrey obrow & stephen carpenter
jeff obrow productions/film ventures international

Not at all credible, yet oddly captivating, this barely known film is an overlooked gem. Hmm, maybe that’s the work of fake Aztec deity Destacatyl, the enslaving god whose power gives this film its name, and apparently will kill whomever tries to control it. This, despite inhabiting a statuette only a few inches tall which vaguely resembles a Mrs. Butterworth (or Aunt Jemima) figurine. Seriously, though, this picture is actually pretty good. Sometimes, just the fact that the cast and crew believe in their creation can be enough, and the actors here are fully invested despite some of the production’s shortcomings. Allegedly released theatrically, distributed straight to video, I can only imagine that this movie never found a larger audience because it lacks for some important touchstones of its era. No nudity, not much in the way of gore, no slasher signifiers, no rockin’ soundtrack … it was doomed to obscurity, but it didn’t really deserve that fate.

why did i watch this movie?

With a nondescript name and a synopsis about possession via a cursed ancient totem or some such, I just HAD to know more.

should you watch this movie?

Well, do you have any better ideas?

highlight and low point

The storyline here revolves around a small-town newspaper with somewhat peculiar standards, and includes breathless dialogue such as, “You know, I remember a time when Sandy McKennah woulda jumped at a story like this.” The story, mind you, involves an unstable supernatural entity with inscrutable requirements for worship and a penchant for trashing rooms, not to mention multivarious physical effects on his or her presumptive adherents – but it’s no less believable than the high dudgeon expressed by Ms. McKennah whenever her journalistic standards are threatened by the suggestion that The Power is real.

rating from outer space: B−

Axe (1977) aka Lisa, Lisa (1974) aka California Axe Massacre

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
written and directed by frederick r. friedel
frederick productions/Boxoffice international pictures, inc.
a harry novak presentation

Despite its bare-bones script, rudimentary plot development, bland camerawork, lethargic pacing, and some less-than-inspired acting performances, I found this flick interesting. Possibly its very simplicity helped, as might its hints that latent violent tendencies on behalf of the victim/avenger were merely awaiting a particular catalyst to turn from self-directed to outwardly focused. Those suggestions gave this film enough of a push not only to overcome its brevity (barely an hour running time) but to invest the enigmatic acting of its female star with a compelling strength that it may not otherwise have warranted. Strangely, this rape-revenge pic (of sorts) isn’t much of an exploitation flick, despite containing all the elements – it’s probably the most restrained and puritanical production possible featuring three murders, a sexual assault, an attempted rape and a police shooting. I always wonder why and how films of this ilk were produced … and in this case, it’s because Friedel – a complete novice, as it turns out – wanted to break into the film business, and somehow sold an investor on this scheme.

why did i watch this movie?

You probably figure it’s because it’s called “Axe” and you know I can’t ignore films titled so … succinctly, but it’s actually because the original title, “Lisa, Lisa,” provoked thoughts of the many amusing movie names bandied about on Seinfeld. (My personal favorite being “Ponce de León.”)

should you watch this movie?

We’re living in a society here, people.

highlight and low point

The many different scenes in which a closeup focuses on the weapon in Lisa, Lisa’s hand tickled my fancy, and Leslie Lee’s nearly unchanging deportment in her depiction also fascinated. The writer/director’s acting as “Billy” is impressively lousy, despite the wise choice of name.

rating from outer space: C+

 

Rumah Dara aka Macabre aka Darah (2009)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by the mo brothers
gorylah pictures/merah productions/guerilla visual movement/nation pictures/mediacorp raintree pictures

Good Lord. If you want blood, you’ve got it with this insane Indonesian production. I barely even know where to begin talking about this gonzoid picture, other than to say I’ve got a new entry on my list of favorites. The setup isn’t anything special – a group of friends gives a stranger a ride home, and she invites them in so her mother can thank them – but the direction is. Unrelenting, intense and horrific and bleak and sadistic, it only begins to let in a little air after it reaches a sort of tipping point later in the proceedings and inevitably skews toward the blackly humorous – likely because little other option existed. Be forewarned, however, that before that happens it’s little but a trip through a special hell, with something to appall just about everyone. A masterpiece of the sick and twisted little corner of the film world it inhabits, this one’s gonna stick around the old memory banks for a while.

why did i watch this movie?

When I was reading up on Kuntilanak, I noticed this title, as Julie Estelle stars in both.

should you watch this movie?

I enthusiastically encourage everyone to watch this movie immediately. You will, however, need a strong stomach and an unhealthy appetite for, yes, the macabre.

highlight and low point

Shareefa Daanish and Arifin Putra are ridiculously evil as Dara and Adam, respectively, but picking my favorite aspects of this flick would entail a really long list. So I guess I’ll just say PROJECT: IMMORTAL SNAKE and leave it at that, unless you’d like me to laud the superlative chainsaw usage. The biggest drawback I can think of offhand is that I found myself wondering when I last saw such an excessively blood-soaked celluloid marvel. Dead Alive, maybe.

rating from outer space: a

Scream – And Die! aka The House That Vanished aka Scream and Die aka Please! Don’t Go in the Bedroom aka Psycho Sex Fiend (1973)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by joseph larraz aka josÉ ramÓn larraz
a blackwater film production

So many titles and so many threatening adverts for such a tepid plod whose only semblance of tension arises from the wait for occasional actress and future lad-mag model Andrea Allan to disrobe. Who’s the killer, you might wonder for an idle minute, correctly identifying the obvious attempts at misdirection, and also realizing that you don’t much care so long as you’re assured the picture will be ending. When it does reach that ending, full dark night abruptly shifts to very bright daytime. Clearly, the filmmakers wanted to get it over with, too. Perhaps this is why they don’t bother tying up any loose ends … such as letting us in on why our heroine got involved in this affair in the first place, or how some of the action could have occurred unless the culprit read the script, or by what means one of the characters ends up dead during the finale when she couldn’t reasonably have been anywhere near the location in question. This movie also contains an incestuous sex scene, because why not throw that in there, too.

why did i watch this movie?

I must have been lured in by the promise inherent in the lurid early ’70s British cinema I’ve been “enjoying” of late, but to be frank, I have no idea.

should you watch this movie?

It’s not nearly lurid enough to justify that.

highlight and low point

The second murder scene is pretty intense, I suppose, but by that point it isn’t even interesting enough to sustain one’s attention. Some of the leftover mod touches of a foundering Swinging London are amusing. A tangential subplot involving pigeons goes absolutely nowhere. Yes, pigeons.

 

rating from outer space: D

Special Effects (1984)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by larry cohen
hemdale film corporation/larjan

More of a suspenseful meta dramedy than a horror film as such, this flick made me wonder how insufferable Eric Bogosian is in real life, as he was really, really good at portraying a total asshole here in his first cinematic lead role, as he also would prove to be a few years hence in Oliver Stone’s Talk Radio – adapted from the stage play Bogosian himself wrote. It also made me wonder what I would feel if I set foot in New York City again, since it’s been so long and so many things have changed so much since last I felt at home there. This tale of a murder disguised (hopefully) as a movie thinks it’s making all sorts of statements about the film industry and aspirant lives shooting for stardom and, you know, Art, and probably a bunch of other stuff, too, but I’m pretty sure the filmmaker just wanted to be clever about his Art. He sort of succeeds in making everything exponentially self-referential, but ultimately, nothing here really walks up and introduces itself. The exception may be the domicile of artist Lowell Nesbitt, where a lot of the action is filmed. Damn but the Art Scene in New York was a profitable one.

«no entiendes»

why did i watch this movie?

A reference to Cohen’s concurrent release Perfect Strangers opined this was a better option. And I’ve been meaning to watch his A Return to Salem’s Lot.

should you watch this movie?

Cohen has a bizarre and somewhat notorious filmography that may interest you.

highlight and low point

The actress who plays the dual lead female role, credited here as Zoe Tamerlis, dominates this category once you realize she was something of an advocate for heroin. (A bold stance, to be sure.)

She died two months after her 37th birthday.

Rating from outer space: B−

but do they have the Miss Piggy

Atração Satânica aka Satanic Attraction (1989)

/ billy peppers / Leave a comment
directed by fauzi mansur
j. davila enterprises

This picture straight from the Brazilian scrapheap is almost completely incoherent. With less than 15 minutes left, the chief of police exclaims – and not for the first time – “but none of this makes any sense!” He is correct. “Satanic Attraction” rivals Maya with its puzzles about who some characters are and what exactly their role is. (Unlike that headscratcher, however, this one isn’t any fun.) Is that a police boat? Why is the heavily pregnant Reporter always wearing a bikini top? Wait, did they just forget that character’s identity? Who is that guy, and what in the hell is he doing here? Possibly the drollest element of this nonsense is its radio-show narration, part of the convoluted sense of SOCIETAL TERROR and OFFICIAL OUTRAGE that you won’t buy for even a minute. But most amusing is that this picture was filmed in Portuguese in Brazil, and the version I watched was dubbed in English but subtitled in … Portuguese. Which doesn’t appear to agree directly with the dubbed dialogue. Which per the usual doesn’t equal the “drama.”

why did i watch this movie?

Well, I WANTED to watch a different Brazilian picture, Shock, but apparently no subtitles for that one exist. This hot mess was suggested as a fill-in, and rightly so.

should you watch this movie?

I know there’s a lot of fans of bad, bad movies out there … maybe you’re one of them.

highlight and low point

The “police work” in this film is really something. This may be excusable, as the victims’ bodies are never anywhere to be found – though somehow the victims are still identified as such. One such casualty, who naturally is taking a bubble bath, fails to realize that a razor blade has been embedded in her bar of soap.

rating from outer space: D