Zophael979 Reviews

Happy Birthday to Me (1981)

Possibly the worst slasher film of the 80s

[19 October 2001]

I rented HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME because of the good word of mouth I had been hearing about it. After watching it, I only had one thought. WHAT A LOAD OF S***!!!

There was some definite effort putting into this, but perhaps a little too much. The writer tried so hard to throw the audience off as to who was the killer that the whole thing became ridiculous. Speaking of ridiculous, I laughed my ass off when everything was explained in the end. Terribly cheesy. I also couldn't seem to care about the characters. Maybe it was the actors or maybe it was the writing, but I just couldn't care that these people were being chopped into little bits. Hell, I even wanted a few of them to die. Also, it's not very scary or suspenseful either.

I will commend the film on having a good lead and a few noteworthy death/gore sequences that made me cringe. Otherwise, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME isn't really worth it. Almost as bad as Halloween III

* out of ****

Carnival of Souls (1962)

A quality horror film

[19 October 2001]

Carnival of Souls is one of the best horror films of the 60s and an obvious influence to the superior Night of the Living Dead. The basic plot is that a young woman survives a car wreck, but finds herself being stalked by a strange man who seems to appear out of nowhere and then disappear back into the darkness he came from. The man's stalking leads to many creepy moments through out the film, both due to the actor and the skill of the director. The actor has a very creepy stare and has this thing about him that just wreaks of death. Harvey's direction is better than solid. This film has a really creepy atmosphere and even made me jump a bunch of times. I must also credit the lead for carrying the film and giving a very believeable performance. She never really seemed like she was acting.

There is one huge flaw though. I already knew the ending after the first three minutes. Even if it hadn't been ripped off countless times after, it still would've been pretty obvious. It doesn't tarnish how effective this movie was, but I would've preferred something a bit more unexpected. Despite that one huge flaw, I highly recommend Carnival of Souls.

*** out of ****

Clownhouse (1989)

Nothing to fear but fear itself....

[11 September 2001]

While we are being sequeled to death in the grand year of 1988, two original classics were made and released that same year. One was PUMPKINHEAD and the other is this little suspense flick called CLOWNHOUSE. The premise is simple. A boy is afraid of clowns and someone upstairs really doesn't like him because three mental patients escape, steal clown gear, and head over to his house for some "fun". The movie, like HALLOWEEN and FRIDAY THE 13th, relies on atmosphere and suspense. CLOWNHOUSE starts in the day and grows creepier and creepier as night falls. The trio of crazies are spotted early on and stalk the boy, Casey, and his older brothers relentlessly until all hell breaks loose for the last half hour.

Part of the greatness of Clownhouse comes from director Victor Salva. He knows that clowns, dark rooms, and Michael Myers-esque stalking is really damn scary. So he does it constantly. From the beginning, there's a real sense of dread. I also credit Salva as a screenwriter for creating likeable characters with mostly good dialouge. All three brothers remind me of some kid that I know. The acting is even suitable. Sam Rockwall is the MVP and the Clown leader is one scary dude. Wouldn't want to meet him in a dark alley.

There are problems. The kids don't seem as scared as they should be when they finally realize the clowns are in the house. Lazy acting, but can be forgiven because they were just children. The murders were all kind of cheesy and they wussed out on the blood. Don't expect any good kills in this movie. While the chase scenes are suspenseful and even intense, the clowns are all dispatched way too easily...especially when you consider that they're getting beaten by scared (?) little boys who haven't even hit puberty yet.

Still, these flaws really don't mean much because Clownhouse has too much good stuff going for it to suck. I found Salva's most recent effort "Jeepers Creepers" to be superior, but his first horror film should definately not be missed. A bit hard to find but it's worth the look.

*** out of ****

Friday the 13th (1980)

A classic....as simple as that...

[11 September 2001]

I love this movie. I really do. Even moreso than John Carpenter's Halloween. Friday the 13th was the other film that helped make the slasher genre popular and it's bloody style was more shamelessly copied than the bloodless Halloween. It would turn out to be a bad thing because too many movies started to rely on pointless gore and the MMPA started cracking down, but that's besides the point.

Unlike the stylish Halloween, Friday the 13th has more of a straight forward look to it. There's no clever shots of the killer moving around in the background. Instead we get normal living their normal lives until one of them just happens to have their forehead split open by an ax. Director Sean Cunningham also pulls off kick ass little tricks with the camera and uses a thunderstorm to great effect. The "dark and stormy night" idea is used to perfection here.

Also on the plus side to this movie are Tom Savani's simple but brilliant special effects and good/adequate acting by the whole cast. Sure there wasn't a Donald Pleasence-esque performance like in Halloween, but there didn't need to be. Crazy Ralph was a kool dude though...

I also loved how pretty much all the teens got the same amount of screentime (until one of them was killed off, of course). While watching the movie, I honestly had no idea who would make it out alive. Just when I thought one person would end up the survivor, they got pulled out of the running when they were found impaled on the shed door.

Honestly I can't praise this movie enough. A gradual pace, laced with kool murders, decent characters, and a killer finale. You aren't a horror fan if you haven't seen this one.

Oh and by the way....it's not a Halloween rip off. Get over it.

**** out of ****

Prom Night (1980)

"Do you still like to play games?"

[30 August 2001]

PROM NIGHT, while not better than HALLOWEEN or FRIDAY THE 13TH, stands as one of the best slasher movies ever made. Head and shoulders above some of the new wave stuff.

STORY-On a script level, this movie was tight. We start with the death that sets the entire story in motion and then we flash forward six years later. The guilty party responsible have all grown up and are ready to attend their senoir prom. Then the tension starts building. The escape mental patient. The creepy phone calls. Morbid notes. This happens through the first hour as we get to know the characters and climaxes in one big blood bath at the Prom. One thing I loved about the movie is how it plays off Halloween. At first we're expecting the story to take the Michael Myers route, but later we're given something completely different. The twist at the end was both surprising and logical. Not to mention heart wrenching. Pacing-wise, everything moves at a perfect pace. I never got bored with this movie and nothing was ever rushed. I have only two complaints. One is that there's a subplot ripped straight out of CARRIE. The other is that damn disco sequence. I was going to give this flick a perfect score before I had to endure THAT. I like seeing a young Jamie Lee Curtis throwing her body around as much as the next guy but the MUSIC....oh, it's horrid.

ACTING-Leslie Nelson is always a pleasure to watch and it was funny to see him acting serious after seeing in all those damn NAKED GUN movies. Jamie Lee Curtis is great as usual. We also get the impression that her character isn't virginal in this one...I dug that. Casey Stevens does a good job of conveying the guilt that his character felt and comes across as a guy you would want to hang with....only if he got rid of that damn afro. Anne Marie Martin plays the bitch well and gives a bit of depth to her character, but has her moments of bad acting. Michael Tough is likeable as Curtis' brother and Pita Oliver won be over as the virgin whose having problems losing her virginity. Obviously no one is oscar worthy, but for a slasher film we get more than adequate performances. The killer is a bad

DIRECTING: Paul Lynch takes a few pages from John Carpenter's book and does well for himself. Some atmosphere. Some suspense. Some great camera angles. Just like John Carpenter's and Sean Cunningham's talents were very responsible for the quality of HALLOWEEN and F13, Lynch made PROM NIGHT as good as it was. This is how slasher movies SHOULD be made.

MUSIC: The score wasn't anything special and disco is always terrible.

BG+P-The violence is mostly offscreen (save for one kick ass decapitation) and the nudity is mostly non-frontal (save for one quick tit shot.)

PROM NIGHT isn't spectular, but it wasn't trying to be. It was a little horror film with a lot of quality. This is where the inferior I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER got it's plot. If you dig HALLOWEEN or F13 and are currently in the mood for another old school slasher, this is the movie you want. Only marred by that goddamn disco sequence...

***1/2 out of ****

Urban Legend (1998)

Did you hear about....

[15 August 2001]

Another SCREAM inspired slasher flick, but one of the better ones. I always wanted to see a slasher movie where the killer had something to do with Urban Legends. Candyman was the first (and the best) film to do it, but then came this underrated little pic and...

STORY: The weakest point of the film. There was some good dialogue and some bad. I can accept that. The problem is the plotholes. Like how could the killer get in the backseat? How did the killer know where Alicia Witt and Josh Jackson were going? How could the killer talk to Danielle Harris on the net when he/she was in her room? The script is dumb, but thankfully grim and full of funny moments. I honestly wasn't sure who the killer was the first time around (it was painfully obvious the second) but the ending was just a disappointment. As a matter of fact, the movie was great up until it took a huge nosedive when the killer was revealed. Simply terrible. Thankfully the movie moves at a good pace and never gets boring.

ACTING: I loved Alicia Witt in this movie. She gets some bad dialouge, but does both emotion and sarcasm very well. Not to mention that she's absolutely beautiful. I was pulling for her to survive. Rebecca Gayheart is funny at the end when she gets to cut lose, but gives a terrible performance that really dragged the flick down. Her expressions always made me laugh...that's not a good thing. Tara Reid does okay, but we could've used more of her. Joshua Jackson and Michael Rosembeum are funny as hell as the comedic frat boys. They really helped the movie. Brad Dourif, Robert Englund, and Danielle Harris all have great cameos. Did I mention that Danielle Harris is really REALLY HOT? Little Jamie Llyod is all grown up...

DIRECTING: Jamie Blanks made a fan out of me here and continued to do so with VALENTINE. He does everything with lots and lots of style. He even does well building some good suspense when the weak script allows it. He didn't pull off ANY of the jump scares though. I liked how his murders were often intense yet showed little to no blood. The openner and the bathroom scenes stand out. I think Blanks could be the next big thing if he finally gets the right script. Maybe he should try writing his next movie himself...

MUSIC: Rob Zombie, Stabbing Westward, loads of other great stuff. UL has no soundtrack but has some of the best tunes out of any modern horror film...thus far. The score was also great. Young really did good work.

OTHER: I hated the killer's costume. That really brought the movie down for me. If you're gonna make a movie about a killer in disquise, get a damn good disguise...oh yeah and the ending was really lame. Urban Legends was a good concept with some good material, blown to s**t by a really stupid ending. Only see this if you're in the mood for a simple slasher film and don't expect much in terms of story...Oh and there's no nudity here but Danielle Harris isn't fully clothed at one point...that's one of the movie's highest

points..

**1/2 out of ****

Scream 2 (1997)

Inferior

[15 August 2001]

I loved the first film and I was jazzed when this one came out. When I saw it, I liked it but it just wasn't as good as the first. Many of the elements that made the first so good were absent and the Craven/Williamson connection just couldn't click twice...

STORY: It was okay, but kind of weak. In the first film, the revelation of the killers was a great twist. Here the murderers are two side characters that you never gave a damn about in the first place. The F13 reference was nice, but could've been far better done. Also, the movie is bogged down by rather pointless scenes, a somewhat slow pace, and a disappointing final confrontation. On the plus side, I liked how the characters progressed from the first film and it's nice that they didn't rethread the first movie's plot. I also really dig it when a main character is unexpectantly killed halfway through the movie.

ACTING: Neve Campell is good as usual, though I liked her better in the first film. Courtney Cox gets to expand her character beyond just being a bitch. I actually liked David Arrquette in this movie. So sue me. Jerry O'Conell bored the hell out of me. Timmy Olyphant was good, but more of him would've been nice. Jada Pinkett is annoying. Scary Movie was able to capitalize on that when it parodied this movie's openner. Jamie Kennedy works well as the comic relief. The chick from Roseanne is just as annoying as she ever was and was completely unconvincing...funny at times though. I also loved seeing Sarah Michelle Gellar in a cameo. Can't ya tell I'm a Buffy fan?

DIRECTING: Wes makes a suspenseful, bloody movie here. I think the final confrontation was too action oriented, but other than that...Wes helps save this movie.

MUSIC: Both the score and the soundtrack are inferior. Beltrami is solid, but his darker, grimmer soundtrack didn't come off well. Why did he have to reuse the crud from Broken Arrow? The soundtrack has some okay tunes, but is less satisfying than the original's.

OTHER: People bleed a lot more when they die in this one, but the first was more violent. Nothing special here except for that cop who ended up on the wrong side of the windshield. I'll say no more...Don't ask about tit shots. More politically correct stuff....Did anyone else think that Ghostface looked drunk in this movie? He had more grace in the first installment.

Overall we have a decent, but inferior sequel. Luckily Scream 3 made up for everything and ended the series on a higher note. Now let's home the series stays ended...we don't want Miramax pulling a Friday the 13th: A new beginning on us.

**1/2 out of ****

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)

Painfully average...

[15 August 2001]

The first movie to cash in on the sucess of SCREAM and the highest grossing of it's imitators. This movie is a decent slasher flick, but is far from great and VERY unoriginal. It does have signify much because it helped launch the film career of it's four stars.

STORY: Is this movie a whodunnit? Because there is really no way to figure out the killer in this flick mostly because we never see him out of costume until the end! Anyways it's full of plotholes and non-logic. How could the fisherman clean up EVERYTHING in a matter of minutes? You know which parts I'm talking about. Also the pacing is kinda off and the final confrontation was a cop out. It went WAY out of it's way to set up a sequel and it sacrificed the ending of this movie. On the plus side, the whole GUILT thing came off well. Probably because Lois Duncan used it in the original novel and it wasn't written by Kevin Williamson. The worst thing is that I KNOW is a straight rip off of PROM NIGHT. And PROM NIGHT was a far better movie with far better suspense and a far better ending!

ACTING: Jennifer Love Hewitts is hot but sucks here. Her character is the sterotypical goodie good and a less than inspiring performance didn't help. Freddie Prinze JR annoyed me and he could barely act here. He's gotten a bit better with time, but that doesn't help this movie. Didn't you just feel like hooking him? Ryan Phillpe does well as the asshole with a heart and even manages to be intense at certain points. Sarah Michelle Gellar does well for herself as the best friend who has victim painted all over her forehead. Muse Watson doesn't have much to do, but he's great when he does something. He gives a cold, angry performance as Ben Willis and it's too bad his character wasn't developed properly. He had the best line in the whole movie: "Kids like you should be out having fun. Partying. Drinking. Running people over. Getting away with murder. Things like that."

DIRECTING: Gillepse doesn't give us much suspense and most of the jump scares are obvious, but he does do some fine stuff here. Take it or leave it.

MUSIC: I can't say I liked the score...at all. The rock songs on the soundtrack were all right, but do we need to hear them right in the middle of a stalk scene? It's a bit distracting...

OTHER: Not much blood here, save for the openning murder. This movie could've used a lot of it. No nudity here either, but when the actors/actresses have already made a name for themselves...well let's just say I wasn't really expecting it. The final shot of the movie makes little sense, but made me jump the first time I saw it. What we have here is just an average slasher film that rips off Prom Night, Halloween, Candyman, and probably Friday the 13th somewhere in there. Pass this one over and go rent one of the classics. Avoid the sequel like the plague...

** out of ****

Scream (1996)

One of the best horror films of the 90s

[5 August 2001]

This movie has been overly praised. It's been unjustly trashed. It's spawned many bad imitations. But at the heart of it all, Scream is one of the most entertaining horror films to come out in a while. Not scary, but suspenseful, witty, and downright funny.This isn't Craven's best work, but it's exactly what he'll be remembered for (along with the Elm Street movies)

STORY: Not really original, but good nonetheless. Scream doesn't take itself seriously and nor should we. The movie was made for horror fans and just simply a lot of fun. You may argue that the story is worthy of much ridicule but that was the basic point. We get a great openner, a solid mystery, and a great, blood soaked conclusion worthy of a slasher film. Solid from beginning to end. The best thing about the story is how they took the "sex is bad" vibe from horror movies and expanded it into something a bit more dramatic. Here we see the uneasiness of preparing to have sex for the first time, how special it can be when you find have it, and...how your sweet sensitive partner can turn cold after the deed is done. It's good that the movie had that much thought put into it.

ACTING: Neve Campell is good here and I really felt sorry for her character because of all that she went through. David Arrquette is alright as the clueless cop. Courtney Cox plays a bitchy tabloid reporter very well. Matthew Lillard was damn funny and Skeet Ulrich gives what's probably the best performance out of the whole film. His character ranges from easy going to intense and he pulls it off very well. I guess looking like Johnny Depp REALLY helps. Also of note are Rose McGowan as the blond best friend, Jamie Kennedy as the horror film expert, and Henry Winkler (aka Fonzie) in a rather ironic cameo. Oh yeah...Drew Barrymore is here too.

DIRECTING: Good suspense. Good camera angles. No cheesy shots. Wes does very well for himself.

MUSIC: Good score that incorporates dark industrial beats with a distorted choir. They even did some Friday the 13th-esque violin stuff for good measure. This movie also has a killer soundtrack with my favs being the ones by Birdbrain, Soho, and Nick Cave. "Red Right Hand" was so good that it carried on to the sequels. My only bitch is that they had a cover of Alice Cooper's "School's Out" instead of the real thing. That's just a crime....

OTHER: Despite what some say, the gore in this movie is actually quite nice. We get some intestines, some good stabbings, the garage kill, and a F13-style throat slashing as well as pails of blood in the climax. All in all a good show. The Nudity here is no existent. Neve takes her bra off but no dice...why does every new slasher flick have to be so politically correct? Really...why? Also, I thought the whole Ghost costume was rather silly, though Craven made it look rather good in some shots. It just adds to the mentality that this film has: anti-serious. Scream is good film and I think that a few of the people who bash it without mercy should lighten up. Comparing this one to Halloween or the Shining is like comparing apples to oranges. Ya dig?

**** of ****

Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)

There was room for improvement...

[4 August 2001]

Sadly, a little too much room. Each entry of the Halloween series has always had the potential to be a good film and this one is no exception. Other than the first two films (which were classics), the Halloween movies have pretty much wasted their potential. This one is no exception.

STORY: It's nice that they scrapped the druid crap, but did they have to leave so many plotholes in the wake? Acknowledging the existence of The Return, The Revenge, and the Curse or giving us an alternate explanation as to where Michael has been for the last twenty years would have been nice. That being said I can't really say much is wrong with the story itself except that the ending was rushed. Terribly rushed. The movie is paced slowly yet the finale goes by too fast. It's uneven and it didn't satisfy me. I'm not really hard to please, but the Laurie vs Michael thing didn't even last five minutes! I did love the part where Laurie locked herself in the school and called out Michael though. Good stuff.

ACTING: Jamie Lee Curtis is OK in this one, but I prefer her work in the first two films. Josh Hartnett is also okay and I didn't have any problems believing that he was Curtis' son. Michelle Williams and Jodi Lyn O'Keefe are both hot in this one and they both did well. LL Cool J could either be funny or annoying...it was half and half. The guy from Chicago Hope annoyed me 100% of the time and I was glad when he bit it. It's the sadist in me...Chris Durand is a decent Michael, but Castle, Warlock, and even Shanks did better.

DIRECTING: What happened to the great Steve Miner who pulled off two classics called Friday the 13th Part 2 and Friday the 13th Part 3? Those were two well paced movies with great suspenseful finales. The direction of prior (and probably poorer) sequels struck me as good, but here it's pretty much average. There were a few good JUMP scares in the beginning but they were overused and got ANNOYING. Also I hate the decision to allow us to see Michael's eyes. I guess it was an excuse to let Durand do more acting but I personally didn't like the change. I also need to mention the mask. They changed it throughout the movie and it was obvious. Enough said.

MUSIC: A good score is usually a constant as far as Halloween films go, but I really HATED the music in this one. The score in the others worked because they were simple. Some piano, a bit of guitar, and a few synths thrown in for good measure. Here they decide to pull out the whole orchestra. It's a departure and (I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record here) I don't approve. Also we have some music recycled from Scream. It was good in Scream but it ruined possible suspense here.

OTHER: Quite a few of the murders are very cheesy while the part where Jodi Lyn O'Keefe met her maker ranks as one of the most brutal murders of the series. More of them would have been swell. No nudity here either. Don't you just hate how they keep trying to make these movies more politically correct? Oh and the ending will either satisfy you or p**s you the hell off. I'm pretty inbetween on the whole thing. This one tried to be and claimed to be the best sequel since the original but it didn't even come close. Storywise it was good, but the execution of most of it was bloody terrible. Here's hoping that Halloween VIII: The Homecoming will be better.

*1/2 out of ****

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)

The word "Curse" really describes this movie.

[4 August 2001]

Actually it wasn't THAT bad....until the third act. What started off promising and what could've been the best Halloween film since the first, ended up a total travesty and an insult to the rest of the series. It took a great set-up done by Halloween 5 and trashed it all to hell. But still....it actually wasn't THAT bad...

STORY: Let me start off with the things I liked. I liked all the little references to the original. I liked the return of Tommy Doyle and how he was used as a direct link to the original film. I liked how they TRIED to explain some series plot holes that had been plaguing the hardcore fans. Hell, I even liked this movie. Then the druids took center stage and everything took a huge nosedive with BOTH the theaterical cut and the producers cut. I'm sure Daniel Farrands had good intentions when he wrote the script, but the studio and the director both got in the way and we got a muddled mess. While the last half hour did have some good parts, it was mostly crap. Steaming crap. It's a shame because I was really into the movie by the point where Loomis, Tommy, Kara, and Danny were all trapped inside the Doyle house with Michael outside the door. If the Thorn crap had been dropped and we had been given a suspenseful finale that kept with the flow of the rest of the movie...well then, Halloween 6 could've turned out to be one of the better sequels rather than one of the worst.

ACTING: This is Donald Pleasence's last film and he gives a great performance. My main beef is that he's underused. He doesn't have one scene opposite Michael Myers and that's a shame. Paul Rudd was great also as the weird but likeable Tommy Doyle and he got the rub from Donald Pleasence to take his place...oops...guess that producers botched that one badly too. Marianne Hagan is on and off as the heroine. The supporting cast is fine and none of them got on my nerves...except for that kid who played Danny.

DIRECTING: The highest point of the movie. Lots of flashcuts. Lots of kick ass lighting. Some suspense. Chappelle did everything well on a technical level, but helped screw the movie over on a creative level. I guess he should've done his job and let Farrands do his. Overall this is one of the best looking and one of the better directed films of the series.

MUSIC: Kick ass guitar version of the Halloween theme as well as the traditional version. On the other hand, Chappelle prefered sound effects over a full score so we got lots of annoying sound effects that spoiled the tension in some scenes.

OTHER: Some good violence here, but two terribly over the top deaths. The first is the broken neck (just struck me as cheesy) and the other is the exploding head (just struck me as plain stupid). Other than that, we have Michael Myers in top form. Oh yeah there's nudity in this one too. Something that a few of the previous sequels sorely lacked. When you look at it, this should've been the ideal Halloween film for the MTV generation. Instead we get stupidity. A lot of effort certainly went into it and they certainly tried to make this more than just another sequel...but they screwed up.

*1/2 out of ****

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)

"I prayed that he would burn in hell...but in my heart, I knew that hell would not have him!"

[14 July 2001]

The fourth sequel to the popular original and more of a psychological thriller than any of the others. I liked that they took the subject matter more seriously and that they took a darker route, but there's too many flaws in this sequel to ignore. A shame too...

STORY: A rather weak script with some kool ideas. The final confrontation in the Myers house, everything that Loomis did, Michael's new mean streak, and the awesome telepathic link with Jamie certainly scored this movie points. Well, the link was handled rather clumsily because never really explained but whatever. I loved how they made it seem that Michael may have a soul after all and his scenes with Jamie were both tense and strangely touching.

It's nice to see Michael develop as a character. I also liked how Michael was treated more like a real serial killer. It added a much needed touch of realism. What I didn't love was the whole Man in Black thing. It slowed down the story and led to an ending that p***** me off. This could be forgiven since H5 was meant as a set up sequel rather than it's own movie. That's the key flaw here. If they had focused on just making Halloween 5, rather than setting up for Part VI, then the movie would have been much better. Also, the comedy just didn't belong here. It detracted from the film's grim atmosphere.

ACTING: Mostly decent. Donald Pleasance gives a spirited performance as Sam Loomis, this time more obsessed with stopping Michael than ever. He was willing to risk Jamie's life in order to stop Michael once and for all and that shows a lot about the good doctor. The scenes where Loomis tried to reach Michael were the most interesting of the film. Pleaseance really made you believe that Michael had a shot at redemption. Don Shanks has a terrible mask to work with, but conveys Michael's sick nature and his rage perfectly. He was also the perfect choice to be Michael during his unmasking scenes. Danielle Harris outdoes her performance from the last film and certainly surprised me with the amount of talent she showed. Meeker was back again and he was great as always. The teens were well acted, but I hated their characters. Wendy Kaplan was credible but her character is too much of a ditz for her own good. She was REALLY hard to watch and I think she died much too easily. The other teens aren't worth caring about either. Too damn annoying. And do I even have to mention Billy?

DIRECTING: Great stuff. A dark, gothic look with some great camera angles. Can't go wrong there. Unlike Little, the director here actually works in some quality suspense and a few nailbiting sequences. Far too good that a fourth sequel really deserves...Now if only they had a better mask to work with....Oh and I loved the intro.

MUSIC: All the 80s rock songs are steaming crap, but the score is one of the best scores of the series. Several remixes of the Halloween theme and creative use of non-instruments. Not as creepy as the first two scores, not as cool as the one in Part 6, but definately good stuff.

OTHER: The gore here is mostly hid by shadows, just like the first movie. No crappy cut aways, but nothing disturbing. The T&A was pretty absent here and that's too bad. It would've been the only thing that woukd make Tina & CO. remotely interesting. Were the blond kids utterly annoying while they were having sex or what?! I considered turning the movie off right there...

This sequel does a lot of things right, but it does several things wrong too. Namely the misplaced comedy, the annoying teens, and the slow middle. Believe me....those things are really THAT bad. A good sequel ruined...I give it **

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)

Ten years later....

[14 July 2001]

After the terrible Halloween III, Michael Myers is back from the great beyond and ready to get down to some good ol' Halloween hacking. The problem here is that this movie doesn't measure up to the high standards set by the first two and absolutely fails at being the least bit scary.

STORY: I personally liked the script here and I feel it had the potential to be the best of the series if it were put into more capable hands. What pi***es me off is the lack of continuation here. Didn't Michael get his eyes shot out? He has 20/20 here. Didn't Michael and Loomis get roasted in that fire? I could see how they may have gotten out alive, but it's a bit of a stretch. This movie had many fun sequences such as Mikey climbing up on the roof and the awesome pick up truck finale. Another problem I have is some of the dialouge. I felt like I was watching the wonder years during the "family" sequences and the whole love triangle reeked of teen-age soap opera and was simply boring. It's nice to see that they kept the plot simple though because the complex s*** was what bogged down the next few entries. The lynch mob was my favorite aspect of the movie. The twist at the end was a classic.

ACTING: Donald Pleasance gives a great performance as our hero, Dr. Loomis. Everything he says or does is believeable. Danielle Harris is damn good in her first movie and as cute as hell. I felt sorry for her when she was being teased and she did a great job of being scared shitless when Uncle Mike came after her. Ellie Cornell does well with her role, but she isn't any Jamie Lee Curtis. The new sheriff is a great character and needed more screentime. Even the drunk hicks were convincing in their attempt to lynch Myers. The rest of the teen actors were pathetic stereotypes, but one gives us a nice ass shot and the other was in Buffy the Vampire Slayer so I guess they'd be bearable.

DIRECTING: Little does a rather sh***y job here. He does create some kool dark and grim surroundings, but the scares are simply crappy. Just a simple and fast close up of Michael doing nothing. Rather lame. This movie also has absolutely no suspense. No stalk scenes. Michael simply walks onscreen and kills someone and then walks off. All attempts to be scary fall flat. I can't help thinking that this movie may have been scary and more atmospheric if it had been in better hands. Little is a fine action director but he knows little about making a horror film. Thankfully his expertise in action helped save the movie from being a total loss.

MUSIC: It had a pretty cool version of the Halloween theme, but the rest of the score wasn't really up to par. It's okay but my least favorite of the series. We also have a few bad 80s pop songs here and there, but they're hardly noticeable.

OTHER: One of the worst things about this movie was Michael's mask. It was incredibly cheesy and made Michael look silly. The murders in this movie also kinda sucked. Michael doesn't go around crushing skulls and it just didn't look right. I like innovative murders, but most of the ones in this movie were simply ridiculous. Their over-the-top style clashed with the dark tone the movie was TRYING to make and that's part of the reason why it failed to be scary. The T&A in this movie is rather scant and it's a shame considering the girl who hid her top...oh well...no big deal.

Overall this is a rather weak sequel to the 1978 classic and you shouldn't bother with it unless you liked the first two enough to want more. It's not a total loss and it's a good movie to watch with your buds. I'm probably being too nice but I'm giving it **.

At least Loomis was great...

Halloween II (1981)

The Night of Samhain...

[8 July 2001]

Halloween was a classic and most dislike sequels. Many have given this movie a hard time, but I disagree with them. This movie IS as good as the original. Not only that, but it serves as the original's other half.

STORY: I liked the approach of picking up EXACTLY where the original left off. It's a very original idea for a sequel and made THE NIGHT HE CAME HOME that much longer and terrifying. What I found to be a good touch was the contrast between the full and well lit hospital at the beginning to the empty and dark hospital of the end. It certainly the perfect setting for a horror film. The script, unlike the original, was pretty tight this time along, giving us further insight into Michael's evil and explained what Laurie's part in his sick quest is. I also dug how the town reacted to what Michael did and the search for him by Loomis is intriguing.

ACTING: Like the first, everyone is decent or at least bearable. Donald Pleasence is back again as Loomis and his character progresses perfectly from the last film. Jamie Lee Curtis is featured in the film less, but we already know her character and she gives another great performance. She plays the paranoid, scared shitless victim to a T...too bad she couldn't do the same in H20. Lance Guest does well as the love interest, who thinks with his heart more than his head. Pamela Susan Shoop makes her character a bit more than the slutty chick who gets to go topless. The supporting cast do their jobs well.

MUSIC: Not the same score as the original and that's a good thing. This time the music is darker and more synth oriented. Like the first, the score does well in creating mood. While I like the original Halloween theme better, I think the overall score of this movie outdoes the first.

DIRECTING: Rosenthal doesn't go for the real world approach Carpenter did. No shots of a pleasant, normal neighborhood. Everything here is really, really dark. In Halloween, the darkness was just there. In Halloween II, Rosenthal goes out of his way to make the movie look scary. This could've backfired horribly, but instead it worked. I also liked how everything in this film looked so grim. Some of the shots he achieved (you know which ones) are totally creepy. This movie gets more tense as it goes along.

OTHER: The gore and nudity is upped here, thankfully. Everything is horrific in it's sheer brutality and nothing is over done. We also gets some more black humor here that you kinda have to pick up on, but it's more obvious than in the first one. The scene where one character slips on blood is one thing in particular.

It's too bad this movie is always in the original's shadow because it is a great lesson in what horror sequels SHOULD be like. Now if only the series hadn't gone in such a downward spiral after this...hell, if only the series STOPPED with this one. I give it ****

Halloween (1978)

What's the Bogeyman?

[8 July 2001]

There's not much I can say about this movie that hasn't already been said before. It's a classic in the horror genre. It didn't create slasher movies (Black Christmas did), but it made them popular. The creepy thing about this movie is it's real world setting and the way Carpenter directs.

STORY: Simple, but this movie didn't need a complicated plot. Complicated plots don't work in most slasher movies. The pace is slow, but the interaction between the characters and Michael's stalker habits keep it interesting. The script is surprisingly weak because of it's huge logic holes (Loomis found Michael's car across the street from the Myers house, yet he had been waiting there all night...how could he not notice it earlier?) and much of the action relies upon unlikely coincidence. Loomis just happened to stop where Michael had hid a dead body?

ACTING: No bad performances here. Everybody is decent, but Pleasence, Curtis, and Castle stand out. Pleasence is instantly likeable as the madman's doctor and I really wanted him to suceed in stopping Michael. His dialouge gave us insight into what made Mikey tick and what kind of man he was. Curtis is PERFECT as the anti-social babysitter who wishes she was more outgoing. She made her character seem real and she wasn't the typically stupid horror movie chick. Nick Castled, who played Michael, was a very believeable serial killer, especially since he had to use only body motion. One of the, if not the best, Michael of the series.

DIRECTING: I don't think that the lack of Carpenter was why most of the sequels failed, but without Carp this one would've sucked. This movie IS the directing. Instead of mindless blood + guts, Carpenter concentrates mainly on building up mood and making the audience wait as long as possible for the killer to strike. It simply works. I also liked how he showed the murders from start to finish. No wimpy cutaways here and no over the top gore.

MUSIC: Two 70s pop songs. One I liked, another I didn't. The score is awesome. The Halloween theme by itself is fine, but the distortion in the background that made it seem that much more creepy and foreboding. The music played during the chase scene is better than great.

OTHER: The stabbing of Judith Myers in the beginning is brutal and probably the bloodiest thing in the film. The other murders are brutal but bloodless stranglings or shrouded in darkness. It works for the film rather than against it. For those who dig T&A (like me), we do get some in this movie but not alot. There is also a pinch of black humor here and there that you may or may not be able to pick up on (like how Wynn walks...it's really funny.)

All in all, it deserves it's classic status. Rent this and the sequel and you have a perfect way to kill three hours on some dark, lonely night. An essential film in the horror genre and no serious fan should forsake seeing it. I give it ****

Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (2000 Video)

You can bury evil and pray that it stays buried but...

[2 June 2001]

The Joker is back and he rocks this party hard. Here we have a truly vicious villian who is really capable of screwing up people's lives as well as taking them. He's also the closest thing to pure evil that you'll find on a cartoon show, not to mention in a comic book.

Bruce Wayne is back as well. As anyone watching Batman Beyond knows, he dropped the cowl a long time ago due to his inability to continue as Batman. The relationship between the original Batman and the Joker comes to a satisifying climax here. Many wonder what it would truly take to drive the Batman into wanting to forsake his vows and actually kill the Joker. This film answers those questions convincingly.

Terry McGinnis is the new Batman. He truly came into his own here because facing the Joker was the greatest test for his character. We actually get some character development.

The story is great. Like Phantasm, it has a backstory that parallels the present story. What happens to one of the characters in this flick has to be the saddest, most grim twist the Batman shows have ever taken. It makes for a very dramatic storyline. The dialouge and the one-liners are especially good, considering how lame they were sometimes on the show. The character interaction and the awesome action simply come together to make a great movie and one of the best Batman stories ever told. I hope that the Batman Beyond live action film is this good. I nominate Will Fredle to be the one to play Terry. I honestly couldn't picture anyone else doing it. I'd be just as sweet to see Conroy as the elderly Wayne, but I suppose Warner Brothers would want an actor with a bigger name.

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993)

Vengeance blackens the soul...

[2 June 2001]

Everything else has already been said here. This is truly the best Batman movie. It puts even Tim Burton to shame. Now I enjoyed Batman + Batman Returns and I consider them fine additions to the Batman franchise, but they didn't focus on the title character as much as they should have. Phantasm patches things up where the live action films went wrong. Here we have Batman seen as the brooding avenger that he really is and we are given better insights as to why he became what he is. His parents don't just die and he decides to be a superhero. The conflict is much deeper than that and well done here. You actually got to know Bruce Wayne, as well as the Batman. Kevin Conroy is the best Batman, bar none. Keaton was good and West was fun, but Conroy simply rocks.

Besides being true to the Batman mythos, it is a great film for other reasons. The score in this movie ties with Danny Elfman's and the Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker score for best score in a Batman film. The use of the choir in the movie was excellent. It was like the voices were speaking to Batman, haunting him and yet urging him on. It reminds me so much of the Crow (and that's always a good thing).

The action in the movie is far from the cartoonish crap that's screwed up the last two Batflicks. We actually get the feeling that Batman may not make it out of here alive. The emotion in this movie is real and not the least bit wooden. The backstory drives at effective parallel to what's happening in the present story. Mark Hamill makes a great Joker (way better than Nicholson who took up too much screentime).

There's nothing really left me to say except go see this movie. The animation may not be top notch, but the story and feeling is very much there. I can't praise it enough...

The Crow (1994)

My favorite film

[1 April 2001]

Cool. Action packed. Sad. Memorable. Inspiring. Epic.

Indeed those words describe "the Crow" very well. The story is a simple one. Eric Draven and Shelley Webster are a couple deeply in love. On the night before their wedding, they are murdered by the local mob/gang for fighting apartment evictions in their building. Eric tries to protect Shelley, but fails. Thus he has to watch his girlfriend being brutally beaten, raped, and left for dead before he is hurled out his window and killed by a deadly five story plunge.

Stuff like that happens in the world often. Too often. "The Crow" asks the question...what if there were a way for the victim to gain retribution? A way for the savage monsters that killed him and the ones he loved to be brought to the harshest type of justice.

Of course, everyone knows what happens next. Eric Draven, played by the great Brandon Lee, returns from the grave to seek vengeance on his killers so he can be reunited with Shelley. Brandon Lee was great in the film, showing Eric's many sides. He also is loaded with charisma. Though Vincent Perez and Eric Mabius have done the role justice, Lee was the best to put on the make-up.

Also in the film, we have Rochelle Davis who gives a great performance especially for a child actor. It's heart breaking to see her when she realizes what has happened to Shelley and Eric, the only people to ever care about her. Ernie Hudson plays the cop in the movie. A good man who stayed with a dying Shelley until the very end. He provides comic relief through out the film, but is also very good. They don't rave about Hudson when they talk about this film, but he should. The villains in the film, though not the most 3D, are very good at being complete @$$holes. Especially Michael Wincott as the gang boss Top Dollar. He is certainly the best villain to grace a comic book movie.

All in all, this film is the total package. Lots of action. A touch of humor. Memorable characters and images. A beautiful Love story. Always sad. Very much a classic and definitely my favorite film. I recommend this to anyone who loves movies. Don't listen to those who labels it as "gothic". The film looks dark, but it's the kind of movie almost anyone could get into.

10 of 10

The Crow: Salvation (2000)

A fine sequel

[28 March 2001]

The Crow was a great film. COA was a good film. Salvation lies somewhere in between them.

The acting, though crapped on by the majority, was pretty good. Eric Mabius played a good crow, who seemed to enjoy his powers a bit and had some witty superhero-esque lines. Kirsten Dunst was nowhere near as bad as others have said she was. Actually she was damn good. Fred Ward was a GREAT bad guy, rivaling Michael Wincott from the first film. The supporting cast all filled their roles well.

Some people complain about the dialouge being terrble. Not really. Some of it was good, some of it was simply plain. One scene that stood out as absolutely terrible is the scene where Corvus persuades Erin Randell to keep her sister's necklace. I can think of ten different ways that scene could have been written better with dialogue that was not CHEESY.

There is plenty of good stuff in this film. We have a GREAT execution scene in the beginning, plenty of action,a hero you could feel sorry for, some good drama, and, yes, for all you perverts, this does have the T&A that is typical of a crow film.

If you're a fan of the franchise and not looking for anything new to be added, then you'll like this. If you didn't like the first one or are expecting something completely originally, then you should skip. I'd rank this film a 9

The Crow: City of Angels (1996)

Not as commercial as many have thought...

[11 March 2001]

Many people who claim to be crowfans say that this film isn't what the Crow is all about but they don't bother to explain why. Many of those people only like the first film and nothing else. While the first movie is my favorite film, it's sequel is certainly worthy of the Crow title and upholds the mythology set by the first film.

This movie could have been better than it was, however. 1/4 of the movie was left on the cutting room floor. Alternate dialogue. Alternate endings. The very good fight/death scene of Kali was actually a great scene beforehand. She doesn't die as soon as she is thrown out the window, but there is some additionally dialogue that expands both her character and the character of Ashe.

When a powerless Ashe falls from grace at the end of the film, rather than Danny's ghost telling his father that "if you stop now, we can never be together", Danny tells Ashe that "it's time to go" but Ashe refuses because he can't leave Sarah to die. With that, Danny turns his back on his father and we don't see him for the rest of the film. This scene solifies Ashe's internal conflict in a very tragic, heart-breaking manor.

What internal conflict you ask? Ashe was torn on whether or not he should complete his mission and join his son in the afterlife or stay with Sarah in the world of the living. You weren't aware of this in the film? It was really only hinted at in the current version. So it all ends happily right? Ashe, Sarah, and Danny are cross into the land of the dead and we have one big happy family, right? Wrong. In the original version, Ashe doesn't go back because his crow is too...well, dead to carry his soul back to the land of the dead. So he is forced to walk the earth separated from those he really loves.

COA was originally a more depressing take on the themes of the first film. There was less similarity in story. Saldy, many scenes were cut for no reason and the ending was changed to make the film more hollywood. What could have been a great film with a great story turned out to be a visually impressive film with vague bits and pieces of a story. It didn't have the deep emotional story of the first because it didn't try to. It was a rather depressing drama of a hero who succeeds and fails at the same time. A different take on the Crow.

But the complaints of the story being too similar does ring true here. Mostly because the stuff that made it different was cut. The makers were probably afraid of fan backlash. Ironic, huh? Vincent Perez was AWESOME as Ashe. I like Brandon Lee better, but Perez manages to give a good performance of a man who contemplates what exactly to do with the second chance he's been given. He also has the insanity thing going well for him. He's different from Brandon Lee/Eric Draven. Standouts from the supporting cast are Iggy Pop and Thomas Jane. Jane's strip club scene was hilarious and Iggy gives a badly written role more energy than it deserved. His scenes with Vincent were great.

There were downsides besides the ones I just mentioned. The movie lacked the good action sequences of the first film. There were a few stand outs but that's it. I was displeased that they never showed Ashe's wounds heal up. The final confrontation between Ashe and Judah should've been longer. The CGI in the movie was terrible. Judah should have been savagely picked apart when he was attacked by the crows, not disappear into nothing. The girl who played Sarah could get extremely annoying at times and the early scenes that focus on her are quite boring. It takes a bit too long for Ashe to get painted up and start on his mission. Why some of the crap scenes were left in and some of the good parts were cut out is a mystery.

Oh and for those who complain about this movie disrespecting Brandon Lee, how do you figure that? Really, I'd like to know. I've heard that this movie was done for money...all movies are done for money. Yes, even the first Crow.

All in all, COA does have serious problems and an annoying plothole or two, but it is far from one of the worst movies ever. See it if you liked the first film and you're looking for an alternative story with the same themes.

Current Version-6 If the original footage was left intact-8.5 or 9