Re: ***Official 8th Annual HTF October Scary Movie Challenge***
10/25/07:
CANDYMAN (Bernard Rose, 1992) 
I found this well-regarded horror effort to be quite stylish (photographed by DON’T LOOK NOW [1973]’s Anthony Richmond, no less!) but essentially underwhelming. Despite its attempts to infuse the proceedings with elements of folklore, mysticism and even romance, the titular ‘monster’ is really no different than the stalker/boogeyman figure of traditional slasher films! Besides, while there are a few effective scares (especially the hook coming out of the mirror – the film is capped, then, by a CARRIE [1976]-like final shock) and considerable gore, Tony Todd’s Candyman wasn’t as scary or as exotic as I had been expecting; even worse, his would-be portentous dialogue is largely incoherent! However, the film has two definite assets in Philip Glass’ simple but haunting main theme and the presence – in both senses of the word – of leading lady Virginia Madsen (surely one of the better female roles to emerge for this type of film in recent times). I’ll still be checking out the first sequel at least, which I rented along with this one.
10/26/07:
CANDYMAN: FAREWELL TO THE FLESH (Bill Condon, 1995)
Dreary sequel, despite resetting the narrative to the tale’s original location of New Orleans (with flashbacks to the Candyman’s grisly fate). This time around, the heroine discovers she’s related to the Candyman rather than being a re-incarnation of his white lover; that said, Kelly Rowan is no substitute for Viriginia Madsen! In fact, apart from Tony Todd’s titular character (who’s even less scary here but, at least, he’s intelligible
), Michael Culkin’s ill-fated professor is the only link to the first film.
Other than the requisite gore (and Philip Glass score), again, we have a subplot involving a black child who lives in fear of the Candyman; additionally, however, we get a bit of irrelvant sleaze (this being conveniently set during Mardi Gras)! The presence of veterans Veronica Cartwright and Matt Clark is welcome; predictably, though, they both end up as meat for the Candyman’s hook
.
While director Condon may have started in horror (this is the only one I’ve watched, actually), he really came into his own when he branched out into other genres – and, quite frankly, I wouldn’t have bothered watching this hadn’t he been involved…
10/27/07:
MASTERS OF HORROR: PELTS (Dario Argento, 2006) (TV)
Like his previous “Masters Of Horror” effort, JENIFER (2005), this feels nothing like the typical Argento film; reportedly, however, his latest project – the much-anticipated (and long-awaited) THE THIRD MOTHER (2007)
is a return to form of sorts for the Italian maestro. Anyway, PELTS again features a surprising emphasis on sex – with lead actor Meat Loaf shown being obsessed with a black stripper! While his role is too small, it was still nice to see an aged John Saxon re-united with the director (24 years after TENEBRE [1982]).
The engaging plot provides the excuse for a simple enough message – “Be Careful What You Wish For” – but the level of gore (even if the make-up in some scenes leaves a lot to be desired) displayed throughout the episode is so extreme, to say nothing of outrageous, as to be amusing rather than repellent or disturbing! Sado-masochism is perhaps a logical step from fetishism, but there’s no real explanation as to why the raccoon fur should have
that effect on people who come into contact with it – unless a suggestion of black magic is intended with the presence of the old woman who owns the land on which the animal was hunted…
10/27/07:
HAMMER HOUSE OF HORROR: GUARDIAN OF THE ABYSS (Don Sharp, 1980) (TV)
Hammer probably regretted not getting the cult classic THE WICKER MAN (1973); this, then, was their chance to make amends (the plot may be closer to the company’s own THE DEVIL RIDES OUT [1968], but the revelation is straight out of the Anthony Shaffer/Robin Hardy chiller). However, the result isn’t exactly special, if eminently watchable (as all of their work still is after all these years). It does feature three past contributors from the horror outfit’s heyday: director Sharp (KISS OF THE VAMPIRE [1963]), imposing villain John Carson (PLAGUE OF THE ZOMBIES [1966]) and ex-starlet Barbara Ewing (DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE [1968]). Then again, lovely leading lady Rosalyn Landor makes as good an impression (and not just for the obvious reason
).
10/27/07:
HALLOWEEN 5 (Dominique Othenin-Girard, 1989)
I had intended to check this out prior to viewing the remake of the original; however, it wasn’t available for rental at the time. Now that I’ve caught up with it, I’m only left with Part 6 of the series to catch up with. I recall liking HALLOWEEN 4: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS (1988) well enough (unfortunately, I lost my reviews for Parts 1, 2 and 4 along with a few others because my computer hard-disk has recently died on me!) – but this takes the franchise back to the mediocrity prevalent in the disappointing second instalment!!
Anyway, the opening shamelessly rips off BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935) with Michael Myers shown to have survived his apparent demise at the end of the previous film; what’s stupid, however, is that he should wait a whole year (i.e. the next Halloween) before going after his niece – what the hell is he up to the rest of the year
? Donald Pleasence returns (for the last time) as Dr. Loomis: I don’t recall how his character behaved in Part 4, but here he’s rather hysterical and unsympathetic; interestingly, his eventual demise is strikingly similar to Malcolm McDowell’s counterpart in the current version!
Even if it came out of nowhere, the possession by Myers of his little niece at the end of Part 4 was an inspired touch; here, however, she reverts to being afraid of him (besides having gone speechless following a murder she herself committed!) – though still telekinetically connected to The Shape, The Boogeyman, or whatever you wish to call him. The teenagers in this installment are among the most boring ever seen in the slasher subgenre – with the heroine (for whom the audience is supposed to root) being especially resistible!
Two days after watching the thing I can hardly remember a scene/slaying I could reasonably call a highlight – including the climax; what I can’t forget is the padded (and idiotic) footage involving the so-called Man In Black whose character was, reportedly, fleshed out (and his identity revealed) in Part 6…
10/28/07:
HAMMER HOUSE OF HORROR: VISITOR FROM THE GRAVE (Peter Sasdy, 1980) (TV)
Again, a number of Hammer veterans were involved in this episode – namely director Sasdy (TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA [1970], HANDS OF THE RIPPER [1971]) and writer John Elder (a pseudonym for Anthony Hinds); however, the plot is totally predictable – down to the unoriginal ‘revelation’ (even if it does work in a final ironic twist)! Even worse are the histrionic performances of the heroine (recovering from a spell in an insane asylum), a female fortune teller she consults (after she keeps seeing a man killed by her in self-defence) and the Swami (hilariously named Gupta Krishna!) to whom the latter refers the leading lady. The hero, then, is played by future “Manimal” Simon MacCorkindale. In the end, it’s all harmless enough – but also one of the lesser episodes in this entertaining horror series.
10/28/07:
THE BURNING (Tony Maylam, 1981)
Opinions vary with respect to this slasher: Leonard Maltin rates it a BOMB, while our own Michael Elliott had awarded it
! Surprisingly, I found myself leaning towards the more favorable rating – though I wouldn’t quite go all the way
.
It
is somewhat better than most of the FRIDAY THE 13TH films – which it most closely resembles in view of the summer camp backdrop. Unusually, though, we learn that the disfigured maniac at the center of it was always something of a villain – which certainly doesn’t elicit our sympathy for him! Still, the hero is allowed to get away with having participated in the prank which sent the former off the deep end (then again, his companions – who are never seen again after the prologue – have it way better than him)!
As for the youngsters, I guess it’s a tie: some kids are likable enough, a few of the girls are certainly pretty but there are, of course, the obnoxious egocentrics/show-offs in their midst as well. Unsurprisingly, the latter get their just desserts but, then, so do a number of the others – with the girls more often than not caught, for our benefit, with their knickers down
.
The murder weapon utilized most often throughout – a pair of garden shears – undoubtedly allows for a number of graphic slayings. Interestingly, then, for the finale, the villain brings out a blowtorch (intending to give the hero the treatment he got himself, albeit accidentally). Needless to say, though, it all ends horribly for the killer (clad in dark clothes
a` la the typical
giallo maniac!) – destined forever to become the subject of camp-fire tales told by the teenagers he hates so much (is the guy unlucky or what?)!!
Technically, the film – which, incidentally, proved the Weinstein brothers’ baptism of fire (no pun intended!) – is nothing special and relies rather too obviously on cheap scares. A definite asset, however, is to be found in Rick Wakeman’s electronic score; Tom Savini’s make-up of the villain – when finally glimpsed – is quite effective, too.
10/28/07:
MASTERS OF HORROR: VALERIE ON THE STAIRS (Mick Garris, 2006) (TV)
This isn’t well-regarded on the IMDB, but I personally liked it well enough. While the plot (based, as were the recently-viewed “Candyman” films, on a story by Clive Barker) features several well-worn elements, the mix proves intriguing and reasonably compelling: failed author, eccentric household, ghostly damsel-in-distress, literary characters coming to life, etc.
Even if there were only two noted performers – the ever-reliable (and quirky) Christopher Lloyd and the Candyman himself, Tony Todd (once again, playing a figure of mystery and menace, a rather effectively made-up demon) – the rest of the cast does well enough by their roles as well, especially the hero and heroine (the entrancing Clare Grant) and the two older women in the boarding-house.
As was the case with the two previous “Masters Of Horror” episodes I’ve watched – both, incidentally, helmed by Dario Argento – this too confirms that TV has finally achieved maturity (with its graphic display of sexuality and violence, and the tackling of subjects previously considered taboo, in this case, a dash of lesbianism). In fact, not being into modern TV series at all, I’d only previously encountered such explicitness – where, however, it was mostly gratuitous and even off-putting – in ROME (2005)…
So how do you defeat a vampire without staking him? Well, it all has to with a species of South American bat that is immune to vampire bats due to a mysterious gas deep in its caves in the Andes and… oh, this is just too silly. Even Adam West and Burt Ward never sunk this low.
) and Bear's records at the vet confirmed she was nearly 16 (born in 1992). My vet said that was unusual for a dog her size living so long. She lived nearly 4 years extra. Knowing that has really helped the healing. Bear's death seemed so sudden because I was preparing for the cancer to take Goldie.
