The Lords of Salem.

Review #2311: The Lords of Salem.

Cast: 

Sheri Moon Zombie (Heidi LaRoc / Adelaide Hawthorne), Bruce Davison (Francis Matthias), Jeff Daniel Phillips (Herman "Whitey" Salvador), Judy Geeson (Lacy Doyle), Meg Foster (Margaret Morgan), Patricia Quinn (Megan), Dee Wallace (Sonny), Ken Foree (Herman "Munster" Jackson), María Conchita Alonso (Alice Matthias), Andrew Prine (Reverend Jonathan Hawthorne), Richard Fancy (A.J. Kennedy), Camille Keaton (Doris Von Fux), Bonita Friedericy (Abigail Hennessey), and Nancy Linehan Charles (Clovis Hales) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007), #1590 - House of 1000 Corpses, #1751 - Halloween II (2009), #1756 - The Devil's Rejects, #1920 - 3 from Hell, #2090 - The Munsters)

Review: 

"50% of you will think this is the greatest thing ever, and 50% will hate it...I think I wanted to let everyone there know that it's OK to feel that way about a film like Lords. It's meant to make you unsure about what you just saw. That's the way the things that I like are—they're not for everybody. People have this delusion that everything has to be for everybody at all times. Every album must be liked by everybody, and every TV show must be liked by everybody, and every movie must be liked by everybody. Everything then becomes bland."

Those with a familiarity with history involving witches or Salem might know that people accused of being witches were not actually burned at the stake. In fact, of the hundreds accused of doing witchcraft in 1692-1693, the thirty that were found guilty suffered the hands of hanging or for the small few, torture (one was pressed until they succumbed to their wounds...and was an 81-year-old man) or death by filthy prisons. Naturally, there have been dozens of books and films that have used the trials as a key topic, whether that involves comedy such as I Married a Witch (1942) or allegories such as The Crucible (play or film). But I suppose it makes sense that one would go and make a film that plays around with the idea that yes, witches really could just be as real as you or me through the old tricks. It was reported in 2010 that Zombie, fresh off the debacle of Halloween II (2009) would get around to writing and directing this film while on his concert tour circuit for shooting in 2011. He apparently had came up with the premise a few years beforehand, but it eventually was tinkered with by Zombie in order to make a "strange, dreamlike movie" (as noted in interviews here, he took inspiration more so from European trials of witches than Salem, which he was misinformed about). He did the film in collaboration with Haunted Movies (so basically, Blumhouse), which at the time had done Insidious and The Bay, particularly because he had total control over the script and casting for a fairly low budget movie. The next Zombie production would come across with 31 (2016), which would go through crowdfunding for certain financing.

I sometimes wonder if I give Zombie a bit too much slack as a filmmaker for all of the fairly average stuff he does. What we have here is a slow burn movie that shows fascination with what Zombie finds interesting about both witchcraft and in "Satanic Panic" that is grim and unforgiving. It may be disjointed; it may not be all that one might think when it comes to the previous Zombie films in terms of stark strangeness in the unfinished cycle of violence but "mixed bag" seems aptly appropriate to try out once if you know what you are getting into. Some might find it basically cribbing from Rosemary's Baby (1968), but given how "fine" that movie was, sometimes you really can just crib from fine movies as long as you don't insult my patience with attempts at simplicity. As before, S.Zombie headlines a R.Zombie film. This time around, there is a passive nature to a character with such a strange and stunted job (it's a radio gig where they hang out about the same level as a couple of inebriated folks) before one eventually sees the logical conclusion of a downward withdrawn spiral. She handles the affair with subdued grace that is probably her most compelling performance for the films I've seen of her. Geeson, Wallace, Quinn play along in weird neighborly charm that is fun to see play out from scene to scene that has fun with self-help in the name of a certain kind of worship. Interestingly, Davison had previously been featured in The Crucible (1996); he was cast when Bruce Dern dropped out of this film due to scheduling conflicts. His curiosity (which went from being a shill for himself to actual curiosity) in the face of impending dread is entertaining to see play out, needless to say. Rounding out the cast is folks such as an unnerving Quinn along with understated presences in Phillips and Foree, who work out fine. The movie has some interesting imagery eventually play out through its trek of dread (such as strange visions or priests) that at least looks like the kind of movie Zombie wanted to just go out and do in having cruelty and uncertainty (for the audience) be the point. As a whole, it might not play well for everyone, but there is promise shown by Zombie in terms of odd duck dread that has a worthy enough cast to carry the waters for a cruel experience that might just work for those that know where to go with a director interested in making a movie to leave you unsure of what you just saw. I ended up going with it enough to say it is fine for one patient viewing, which is more than enough when trying to branch out for horror movies down the road.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next up: We close out our sixth week after Halloween with John Carpenter's The Fog.

Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre III.

Review #2262: Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre III.

Cast: 

Kate Hodge (Michelle), William Butler (Ryan), Ken Foree (Benny), Toni Hudson (Sara), Viggo Mortensen (Edward "Tex" Sawyer), Joe Unger (Tinker "Tink" Sawyer), R. A. Mihailoff (Leatherface), Tom Everett (Alfredo Sawyer), Jennifer Banko (Little girl), Beth DePatie (Gina), and Duane Whitaker (Kim) Directed by Jeff Burr (#1104 - Stepfather II)

Review: 

You know, the idea of making another Texas Chainsaw Massacre film didn't make me roll my eyes like I thought it would, even with the first film officially turning 50 years old this month. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) was a decent audience favorite in the annals of "made some money". Sure, some people hated it (a horror sequel that the establishment can't get behind? waiter, this dish is cold!), but the eyes of a cult following always wins out, and I sure liked it just fine. Anyway, The Cannon Group had the rights to the series purchased by New Line Cinema, who naturally thought of wanting to do their own Chainsaw movie. The film was written by David J. Schow, who is mostly known for his horror fiction, which is sometimes labeled as "splatterpunk". He wrote a handful of screenplays for film (direct-to-video and features) along with TV; interestingly, he would go on to co-write the screenplay for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006). Jeff Burr was brought in to direct after ideas of asking Tom Savini and Peter Jackson failed (Jonathan Betuel also came in and out) before they went with Burr. Burr made roughly over two dozen features (some for video) that were generally in horror (with few exceptions such as Eddie Presley [1992]) prior to his death in 2023 at the age of 60. The movie was quickly shot in the summer of 1989 and was shot in California of all places. The rating of the film was meant to be an R but take a guess at how it worked out with the MPAA; the original rating was an "X" before several minutes were cut from it (remember that the last one had been released unrated), particularly with the ending that basically saw the negative cut right then and there before a release not in the fall of 1989...but in January 1990. They apparently fired Burr and then re-hired him (and then they let him go after production ended to help edit a new ending, thanks to Michael Knue). The middling audience reaction led to New Line ditching the rights, but the next in the series would come out with even less fanfare in The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1995).

What? I was fine with this movie. Honestly, this was pretty surprising. Sure, it may not be as horrific as the original feature or as darkly glee as the second feature, but I thought it was suitably entertaining in the same way that one is seeing a wind-up toy refined for enjoyment. It is familiar and semi-glossy without making me think of it as a huge sellout because the characters are semi-compelling. It is familiar goop involving the dangers of, well, picking up a conversation with people on the backroads in Texas that I can accept. When talking about the film and its troubles with the MPAA, one statement included by Burr (whether by them or him) is that the films "all revolve around an alternate family unit who does not have any conventional morality." Really the films all seem to play around with different perspectives on the same idea of loopy people who just do whatever they please, which here is cut and dry when talking about a creepy child or Leatherface spelling "f-o-o-d" with a learning tool. To introduce the film when it comes to the travel is Hodge and Butler, who may be ordinary, but they at least are useful lambs to the eventual terror. Undeniably, the highlight is Foree. The power of Foree is that a test screening liking him so much ended up influencing a decision to edit the film (without the knowledge of Burr) so that his character doesn't die at the end (evidently the last shot wasn't exactly the choice of Burr either). Playing a survivalist who just happens to hit the backroads only to encounter weirdos is a useful task for a character actor to chew on, so points to Foree there. Evertt and Unger, and (in particular) Mortensen, are weird enough on their own to fit the standard set from before with goofy abandon. The mask for its title character may not be as ideal in grim quality as before, but the character is one driven by seemingly seeing everything as food that I find to be a strangely curious one to view as a pitiful creature (pity, no pity, you get the idea). Regardless of how the film would've been in a different moment where the loser MPAA didn't get in the way of its violence or with someone not as weird in franchising as New Line, I found this to be a solidly average movie (the 85-minute runtime is short as well). It is not better than the two films that preceded it, but it did not offend my tastes or expectations when it comes to making a play on familiar aspects with loopy flair. There is enough for me to like to actually say one should at least give it a shot when it comes to saw action.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Frankenstein looms.

The Devil's Rejects.

Review #1756: The Devil's Rejects.

Cast: 

Sid Haig (Captain Spaulding), Bill Moseley (Otis), Sheri Moon Zombie (Baby), William Forsythe (Sheriff Wydell), Ken Foree (Charlie Altamont), Matthew McGrory (Tiny), Leslie Easterbrook (Mother Firefly), Geoffrey Lewis (Roy Sullivan), Priscilla Barnes (Gloria Sullivan), Dave Sheridan (Officer Ray Dobson), Kate Norby (Wendy Banjo), Lew Temple (Adam Banjo), Danny Trejo (Rondo), and Diamond Dallas Page (Billy Ray Snapper) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007), #1590 - House of 1000 Corpses, #1751 - Halloween II (2009))

Review: 

I will give credit to Rob Zombie in one aspect. Anybody who can generate enough interest to get a bunch of folks interested in making horror movies with familiar faces and premises that border on halfcocked and half-original for over two decades certainly merits curiosity. At least this time around one will not be able to see the film as just some sort of offbeat take on horror films like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), if only because Zombie has decided to take inspiration from other features that range from Bonnie and Clyde (1967) to Badlands (1973). The art of the grotesque has taken its talents to the road, you might say. Technically speaking, it is superior to House of 1000 Corpses (2003), even though the only thing those film have in common is Haig-Moseley-Zombie as the main focus (i.e. no weirdo travelers or even the use of Karen Black, who apparently demanded too much money to return to the role now played by Easterbrook). Experienced horror folks will be right at home with a film like this, one that rolls with brutal swings without having many hitches in its step. Zombie has a knack for making the detestable come off as curious, which I suppose helps when trying to do a psuedo-70s movie (I say this since one really does have to put on a few blinders again when trying to buy this as 1978), complete with a selection of songs that differ from the earlier approach of having Zombie doing his own music (which is fair on its own, but sometimes you need old-time music).

What can I say? If you deliver a fine time with people worth caring about or creepy scenarios with a useful payoff, you have the formula for what a good amount of folks want in horror, and this movie manages to accomplish that in spades by improving on what had been done before from Zombie (and the films he dabbles in cribbing from) that proves gruesome and curious at the same time. It makes for an interesting 107-minute run-time, that much is for sure. If you like seeing Sid Haig in a demented role that inspires a few dark chuckles, you will certainly get what you want here; the best scene might be when he is "borrowing" a car and he asks a kid why they aren't too fond of clowns....so he lets him go and tells him he better have a good reason when he comes back (or...oh hell, you know). Moseley follows along with a terrific role of brutal effectiveness, one that can equally serves as the mark of a devil's servant along with dutiful straight man to this cadre of eccentrics, who can go from bloody events to wanting ice cream in a few minutes. S. Zombie certainly has improved on the wicked allure from two years prior with an added sense of menace that means there is no weak link among the main folks when it comes to unbalanced tools unlike anybody you've seen before. Think about it: we are following some very violent folks for most of its run-time, and yet the folks we are watching are fairly interesting in those moments spent together that muddles the line of what you might usually see from films in the genre, particularly when contrasted with the other side of the coin in the pursuer and the one being pursued. Forsythe (told to base his character as a combination of Lee Marvin and Robert Shaw) certainly homes in the right sense of demented rigidity that makes him a worthy piece to the proceedings, a tool of obsession that has a few moments to let out worthy enjoyment, particularly with the setup for the climax. Foree does pretty well in amusing relief, resonating well when paired with Haig for a few interesting lines together, while the others in the supporting cast are fair for what is needed. Honestly, while I appreciate the build to the climax when it comes to throwing the depravity on its head, I think it nearly stumbles with its resolution (remember that it wasn't exactly just three folks in the last one...), but I do think the final shot will likely resolve that doubt for the most part. If you are squeamish when it comes to certain kinds of horror, it won't prove much for your fancy, but I am sure you know where you want to see in your horror movies anyway. The next film in the series (called the "Firefly trilogy" by some folks) would not happen until 3 from Hell (2019), but at least one knows that The Devil's Rejects has managed to fare well as when it comes to the curiosity of this being the most interesting work that Zombie accomplished in his first few years as a director in executing depraved sequences with useful timing and folks to hold it all up.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Well, here is the end of another month (and one week) of horror. 27 films that ran the gauntlet of the 20th and 21st century. I hope you folks enjoyed the largest effort of Movie Night's near eleven-year history for concentrated writing about horror; sure, there will be a handful of horror-ish movies covered in the next few months, but suggestions are always welcome. 

Dawn of the Dead (1978).

Review #1155: Dawn of the Dead.

Cast: 
David Emge (Stephen "Flyboy" Andrews), Ken Foree (Peter Washington), Scott Reiniger (Roger "Trooper" DeMarco), Gaylen Ross (Francine "Fran" Parker), David Crawford (Dr. James Foster), David Early (Mr. Sidney Berman), Richard France (Dr. Millard Rausch), Howard Smith (TV Commentator), Daniel Dietrich (Mr. Dan Givens), Joseph Pilato (Head Officer at Police Dock), Tom Savini (Blades/Mechanic Zombie shot through glass/Zombie hit by truck), and Taso Stavrakis (Sledge/Fountain Zombie/Sailor Zombie/Chestburst Zombie) Directed by George A. Romero (#738 - Night of the Living Dead)

Review: 
Night of the Living Dead (1968) was a great horror film upon its release, shocking audiences with its gore effects in crisp black-and-white photography that resonates in the despair and terror it showcases in its main enemy - us, as members of the dead brought back to life that eat flesh handily written by George A. Romero and John Russo. It wasn't the first zombie film, but it certainly holds an impact now for the zombie horror genre in the half century since its release. In the ten years that followed its release, Romero certainly kept busy with film-making, directing films such as The Crazies (1973) and Martin (1978), both of which are now considered cult classics. Romero got the idea to write the script from a friend's suggestion about surviving in a mall in the event of an emergency through hidden parts of the mall. This time around, the budget is slightly bigger (over $1 million as compared to the $114,000 of the original), and Romero also serves as editor again. One key help in raising funds was Dario Argento (famed Italian director of films such as Suspiria (1977)), who helped secure money to make the movie in exchange for international rights, and he (alongside a band called Goblin) would contribute the music. Subsequently, there exists different versions of the film besides Romero's final cut (which lasts 127 minutes), due to re-cuts and re-edits that Argento could make for international foreign language releases, such as a 119 minute version that takes out a few scenes with exposition and a faster pace with a bit more dialogue and gore, which was released in Italy on September 1, 1978 as Zombi: L’alba dei Morti Viventi, months before Romero released his cut in America in 1979.

In a span of roughly four months, Romero and his crew filmed most of the movie at the Monroeville Mall in the city of the same name in Pennsylvania, which they did for the time the mall was closed (11PM-7AM). The decision to have the film primarily be set in a mall proves to be a brilliant one, with several places for the characters to hide out and deal with the dead that perhaps don't seem too different from conventional shoppers, a subtle bit of satire that works pretty handy with the rest of the film, which has its bits of terror along with humor, which balances out pretty well. The main quartet of Emge-Foree-Reiniger-Ross prove to be a entertaining group to follow along with, with my particular favorite being Foree, probably the most confident of the group much like Ben from the original. Reiniger is also pretty amusing, especially when he goes down on an escalator slide. Emge and Ross are okay. Like before, the film shows the terror that would arise from an influx of the undead and what that would mean for society, from the arguments in a TV studio to conflicts in housing projects that are grim yet effective in setting up the premise without having too much exposition. There's also a bit of conflict and struggle in the fight to survive that we see from the group, particularly in the opening half, but as they warm to each other we grow to really follow these characters and enjoy their pursuits in the mall - which seems to be more than just a haven for stuff or safety. The scenes where they enjoy the mall are pretty amusing at times, and the sequence with the bikers is also handled pretty well, complete with an amusing use of pies.

Undeniably, the highlight of the film is the gore effects, done so by Tom Savini, with the undead being bluish-grey with bright red blood that contrasts with the previous film that looks pretty good in his own right. The gore may not be for everyone's taste, but I found it thoroughly enjoyable, having a gruesome nature and effective feel that goes along an enemy that still manages to invoke terror. I enjoy the beginning parts and the climax better than the middle, but the film doesn't drag or feel too long - although if you want more there also exists an extended version that lasts 139 minutes, which Romero had quickly assembled to show at the Cannes Film Festival. The next film in the Living Dead series came out seven years later with Day of the Dead; all three films have had remakes, with Zack Snyder serving as director for his version released in 2004, with a few cameos from members of the original cast. It lives up to the original film not by being something completely different or going by the same beats as before, but by doing something fresh and compelling that makes this not just a great sequel but also a great horror film in general.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.