Indie Short Review: 2 Hours

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2013
Free link to view complete film below review
Images from the Internet

 

2 Hours
Directed, shot and cut by Michael Ballif                                      
26 minutes, 2012             
2hoursthemovie.com

Apparently, from the time one is bitten by a zombie, it takes two hours for the virus to course through the victims system until succumbing and then becoming one. This is the premise of this totally serious zombie genre short that is nothing short of beautifully done.

While feeling guilty about the death of his girlfriend (Brooke Hemsath, who recurs in guilt- and feverish-flashback fashion) the Survivor (Josh Merrill, who also wrote the piece) goes through forests and ruined cities hoping to find a group of other survivors before becoming zombie feeder fodder. Problem is, he has been bit, and has just two hours to find the group and hope they have a cure.

There are some interesting dual aspects to this film. One is that the zombies are both slow and fast. They stumble around looking for victims, but when one is spotted, man, can they run. They’re a bit clumsy on their feet, but they will run you down.

Another duality is the fluidity of that sometimes the film is seamlessly shot as third person, and other times in first person, even looking a bit like a shooter video game.

While the Survivor (as he is named in the credits) silently  and desperately searches for the others while avoiding marauding flesh eaters (more Romero-esk all organ diners, rather than just the cliché brains), we hear his thoughts as the virus slowly but surely starts nibbling at his rationale.

While his deterioration is what makes the core of the film, the visuals are actually quite impressive, with beautiful as well as ugly landscapes, wonderful make-up and gore effects, and for once hand-held camerawork that doesn’t make you want to barf like the Survivor.

Considering the low-budget, small crew, two-year filming timeframe, and all shot on a $500 Canon T2i DSLR, I’m still not surprised this is sopping up Festival awards left and right. Not only do I recommend this, you can watch it just by clicking on the link below. Scary to think what Ballif could do with an actual budget. Kudos, dude.

 

And be sure you stick around after the credits...

 

Review: Abolition

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2013

Images from the Internet

Abolition
Directed by Mike Klassen
Abolition films / R-Squared Films
82 minutes, 2010 / 2012
Rsquaredfilms.com
MVDvisual.com

As much as the word “abolition” ( the overthrow of something) sounds similar to “absolution,” so this film jiggles with the line(s) between good and evil.

Even with a somewhat high gross (e.g., vomit) and gore quotient - even though most of it is after the fact, such as brains splattered on the sidewalk after a jump - this is a very story-based project. Unlike the usual Biblical-themed action thrillers like The Seventh Sign (1988), End of Days (1999), Bless the Child (2000) or Constantine (2005), the pace here is more of a build than a burst, as it should be. One of the positive side-effects here of it being done that way is that it definitely makes the viewer work harder on the coming events. With most films, many times I’d say,”Oh, this is going to happen at some point,” and it does, but this more lured me in with bits of info, keeping my attention.

I’m certainly not going to give away much, because it’s rare that a film works this well, especially for a first-time director such as Mike Klassen. There are a couple of moves that felt a bit amateurish, such as the obvious use of a wide-angle lens to indicate things being out of sorts, but that is how one learns. If the viewer sees the film as a whole, it’s quite impressive. Even with the occasional plot hole, it plays out so well. Again, you look at some directors like Cronenberg, Hooper, Craven, Carpenter, and the like, their early films also had questionable moments of mire, sometimes more than here.

One of the things that impressed me the most is that this film has its own feel, that certain vibe and look. There is also a level of subtly that works towards the grand reveal. When dealing with a storyline with no comic relief, all the elements need to work together as not to feel oppressive; this one walks that line successfully.

Klassen should also be acknowledged for some of the talent he has chosen for his leads, especially Andrew Roth as Joshua, an recently unemployed building superintendent who is trying to figure out why whenever he helps people, bad things seem to happen, especially in Sybil (1976)-type blackout moments. Roth is gaunt, intense, and has total movie-star appeal. He’s so much better an actor than many of those making so much more, such as Adam Sandler, the Wilson brothers (Owen and Luke), and Vince Vaughn. It’s not surprising he’s been in over 40 films, though he still needs the right vehicle to get recognized).

The female lead is Mia, played by Elissa Dowling, definitely an indie film demi-goddess). She seems to pick many quirky roles, usually in the horror genre, such as in Creep Creepersin’s Peeping Blog (2011) [Reviewed HERE] or Bloody Bloody Bible Camp (2012) [Reviewed HERE]. Whether a sex comedy or an intense story, she is always fun to watch; plus, she has impeccable timing whatever the genre. Yeah, I’m a fan.

Matthew is a pivotal character, a bitter man who gave up the priesthood for family, only to also lose them (named after the first book of the New Testament, I’m sure), played by Reggie Bannister. Bannister will forever be associated with the Phantasm (1979) series (yes, he still has the ponytail), but over time has proven himself to be more than just that. Matthew takes in the homeless Joshua, a relationship that is bound to change over time and a decisive puzzle piece to the overall story arc. While Bannister does have a tendency to do a bit of curtain biting, he is also extremely effective in this role as he eventually goes all Renfield. Oh, as a side note, Reggie also starred in the aforementioned Bloody Bloody Bible Camp.

As I said, the question here is who good or other, and what acts are positive or perhaps something more sinister? One of the underlying issues in the film that is well handled is the desperation and loneliness of the down-and-out, be it through substance abuse, poverty, physical and verbal abuse, suicide, prostitution, homelessness, or any combination above. While on paper it may sound like this film is trying to achieve too much, it all works together, albeit in a bleak way. But it is that despair that drives home the central theme of the story leading to its… well, check it out. It may not be the feel good movie of the year, but it will certainly keep you guessing and interested.

  The only extra is the trailer. For this one, I would have loved a commentary, but as the great stage director Roger De Bris said in 1968, quell dommage...

Review: Dropping Evil

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2013
Images from the Internet

Dropping Evil

Directed by Adam Protextor          
Wild Eye Releasing                        
82 minutes, 2008-2012      
Wildeyereleasing.com
MVDvisual.com

 The publicity for this indie is proud to state – and does so often – that they had the whole idea of watchers as some kind of overlords to a group of teens who are brought together in seclusion for a reason unknown to the youngsters way before the recent hit, A Cabin in the Woods (2012). And rightfully so. Do I think the makers of Woods ripped off this film? Highly unlikely, even though it took four years to film this one, but Dropping Evil is low budget enough that it probably wouldn’t have been noticed by the big boys.

This piece of cinema is definitely one of the more ambitious indie films I’ve seen in a while, and certainly a brave release. It’s not surprising it took so long to record and let loose. The question I have is as follows: how successful is it in reaching its goal?

Well, certainly, there are problems. Note that any indie film has its issues, no doubt, especially one with this vast a cast and ambition in story. And the sheer filming time frame must bring its own set of issues.

From what I can figure out through some of the story is that there are at least three separate levels going on (how very X Files / Lost). First, there’s the four life-long mid-20s high school students off for a weekend in the woods, including a couple (Tom Taylor, Rachel Howell), and as a possible set-up, a nerdy girl (Cassandra Powell) and a volatile religious fanatic (Zachary Lint; he even gets upset when his bottle of juice is next to a beer can in the cooler). Add a little tripping powder and “Mr. Jesus” (whose name is Nancy, by the way, which is never really explained other than his mother chose it) gets busy with an ax, as is seen on the DVD box artwork.

On the second story level, we view the ValYouCorp organization, who apparently specializes in artificial body parts and robotics (played by actors wearing motorcycle helmets), but who seems to be looking at a (evil?) larger picture than is let on at first. It is run by scheming CEO (played by name character actor Armin Shimerman; you’d know him is you saw him, e.g., as Quark on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, or Principal Snyder on Buffy the Vampire Slayer). His vision, involving the four friends, could change the fate of the entire world.

The third level is more meta-physical and less clear. From what I can figure out, it involves God, who seems to be missing (shades of Kevin Smith’s 1999 Dogma), a host of other older gods and goddesses from the Classic Greek period, and even older gods than that called the Titans (whom Zeus defeated to become king of the gods in Greek mythology; scarily, I knew that without having to Wikipedia it. That’s right, I used it as a verb, wanna make somethin’ of it?). A new war coming? Again, it is reminiscent of another film, The Prophesy (1995).

This is a mixture of both a dark comedy and an occasional slapstick one, the latter of which is more successful. For example, one of the better moments is handled deftly by the lovely and underused ex-Troma actor and current exploitation queen Tiffany Sephis, who plays the goddess Dionysia (I met her once at a Chiller Theater Con in New Jersey during the 1990s, during her Troma days, and she was very nice).

Honestly, as original as the story is, and credit should certainly be given, it is also exceedingly convoluted. Half the time I didn’t know what anything meant to the storyline, and there isn’t really too much of a conclusion that explains it. I would, however, recommend following the film with the two deleted scenes and especially what is called the “sequels,” three shorts (between 15 and 20 minutes each) that come with the DVD in the extras. My guess is that it was either too much footage for put in the film, or too short amount to make a true, complete sequel. But it will definitely help fill in some of the questions (but not all) that are bound to come up. And besides, this is the only way to see any of the footage of ‘70s action star Fred “The Hammer” Williamson, in a bit of an extended cameo that is not really explained well¸ as is another short bit by Edwin Neal, who plays the POTUS; not bad for someone who started as the insane hitchhiker in the original 1974 The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.

The film has a bit of everything (too much?). For example, when God is missing, people do not die no matter how grievous their injuries, and the dead also arise. This gives way to an amusing social bias between those who died before or after God’s disappearance. This would make an interesting full-length feature in itself, especially in our current zombie-fixated and partisan culture.

With this entire convolution, what actually annoyed me was the shoddy camerawork. It felt like a high school project. Shaky cameras are bad enough, but badly handled shaky cameras are something else. There are also some larger choice questions I had, such as: if ValYouCorp can make a camera that that fit inside someone’s eye without being detected, then why does their hit team need to film their excursion into the woods with a 1980s sized camcorder?

Despite my whining, there are a lot of imaginative uses of the image, such as thoughtful switching between color and black-n-white, stylized imagery (including with the hit team mentioned above), and the occasionally really smart use of contrast and lighting.

There are a few good giggles in there, and at least three times I found myself laughing out loud. It’s a fun film, but it does take some work to watch (i.e., it can’t be put on in the background if you want to make anything of the plot), and whether you think it is or not, could depend on factors such as some history with J.J. Abrams and Chris Carter material, how stoned you are at the time of viewing, and level of patience. Especially the latter. I enjoyed the experience, but felt exhausted.

As a sidebar that has nuthin’ ta do with nuthin’, I find it cool that the actresses of the two couples of youngins have last names that rhyme.

VOD [HERE]

 

Review: The Dead Matter

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013
Images from the Internet

The Dead Matter

Directed by Edward Douglas        
Midnight Syndicate / Precinct 13 Entertainment            
89 minutes, 2010 / 2012    
Thedeadmatter.com
Midnightsyndicate.com
MVDvisual.com

A modern vampire story with no werewolves? Wow, I am unsarcastically impressed. At least there are zombies. But I get ahead of myself, sorta. The whole film has a really good look, for the $2 mill budget, reminding me of quality fantasy television shows like Supernatural or Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Despite whatever problems I found with the film, it’s an enjoyable viewing exercise, and worth the rent.

The film opens in a small town in Germany with a bunch of zombies stumbling along in the thrall of a vampire, rather than wanting to eat some wet bits. Well, at least they have the mandatory gray shade and blood/gore attached to their faces.

We momentarily meet the main vampire of the story, Vellich, played by Andrew Divoff, who was also in the film Wishmaster (1997) and on television’s Lost. He tends of overact, but it’s good. The odd thing is he wears this long, flowing white wig that is so obvious, and makes no sense whatsoever, and it nothing less than distracting. The director says during the commentary that it is very much along the lines of Hammer Films, so I’ll give him that.




Andrew Divoff on the right

What Vellich and the zombies are in search of is a scarab-shaped amulet, being protected by the bearded Ian (Jason Carter, of Babylon 5) and the muscular Mark (Brian van Camp). They escape and take the necklace to a “mystical nexus,” or as we know it… wait for it… Ohio.

It’s there that the amulet gets hidden before a big fight, and is found by two couples. More about them later. Meanwhile. Vellich runs into a new order of vampires in the Buckeye State, who are under the wing of Sebed (make-up and effects wizard /actor / legend Tom Savini). He envisions an almost mafia-like vampire society with himself as Don, while Vellich is old world / old school. And we all can guess who is going to come on top by the end.

Now, does any of this sound familiar? There are a whole lot of themes from other films here, and I’m not saying this in a negative way, exactly, I’m just noticing the trend. For example, taking the trinket to somewhere else to destroy is right out of Lord of the Rings (2001), modern vs. old zombie clan(s) could be Blade (1998), Underworld (2003), perhaps Twilight (2008). During a séance featuring the aforementioned couples, amorphous shapes come out of the amulet and swirl around and through the participants, straight out of Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).

But, let’s get back to the aforementioned foursome. Y’got your nerdy scientist dude, Frank, played (sorta) by Christopher Robichaud. This is his only credit. He plays the role like someone in a cheap ‘50s horror film. Actually, he reminded me of the main character of the classic Equinox (1970). His clothes look like that as well (checked yellow-tan shirts, and the such; at least they didn’t give him glasses). The director and producers are solidly behind Christopher, so maybe it’s me? Frank works for a corporation making a diet product.

Next up is his newish girlfriend, Jill, portrayed well by CB Spencer. Where Frank is logical and scientific, she’s more Wiccan closer to the supernatural. She’s pretty solid in the role.



Sean Serino

The hero (does anyone still say heroine) is Gretchen, played by the amazingly cute Sean Serino. Killer smile, dude. Gretchen is in pursuit in finding a way to contact her brother, who died in a car accident while she was the driver. Nearly a Candide figure (look it up), she tends to look at the positive side and be cheerful, even when there’s a zombie at the door and vampire in pursuit.

Her boyfriend is Mike, acted by Tom Nagel. Mike may be the logical one who help keep it real for Gretchen, but he comes across as just a bit of a dick (sort of like the husband on that show The Medium). Truth is, the part is seriously underdeveloped, and you can tell that Nagel is a better actor than as the role is written.

That may be the biggest problem with the film to me – which is actually quite enjoyable, despite all the flaws I’ve mentioned – in that with the exception of Gretchen, there really is little context or character development.

I found it amusing that one of the better characters is a nearly voiceless zombie under Gretchen’s control. Brian van Camp does a spendid job keeping us interested in Mark, even though all he does basically is stare into space while eating, drinking, and other things asked by Gretch, or whoever else touches the purple-glowing amulet.

While not a comedy, there are definitely some fine comic moments. One is Gretchen putting one of those car pine-shaped odor eaters around the zombie’s neck before an amusing montage as she takes Mark for ice cream (relevant to a memory of her brother) and to a merry-go-round. Another is the following dialog (which is included on the IMBD page, so I don’t feel like I’m giving anything away):

Jill: A zombie?
Frank: They prefer to be called Post-Mortem-Americans.

While the story is occasionally incoherent (why does the vampire want the amulet exactly? Okay, it controls the dead, including vampires (who are dead), fingernails and hair, apparently, but why he wants that control is never really explained. And why do the new vampires want to get their cohorts addicted to a drug? Yes, there is a positive side effect explained in the film, but not enough to make them drooling junkies shooting up.

There is a decent if not abundant amount of gore, such as a ripped off head and a yank-removed jaw. There are also some fun surprise moments, especially towards the end that alone make this worth the view.

There are a few extras that are noteworthy including a gag reel and theatrical trailer. There are also a bunch of music videos that are okay in the spooky or death metal way. The longest is a feature-length documentary called “Maximum Dead Matter” in which the screen is broken up into four simultaneous sections. The top left is the film running, and the other three are full of interviews, original art, behind the scene shootings, and make-up. It is the most interesting when they involve the actual scene that’s running at the moment. It gets tiresome at times, but I watched the whole thing and wasn’t sorry.

The best extra is the commentary track with the director, producer and co-writer. Even though it was hard at times to tell who was talking (i.e., three dudes), they explained some of the questions I had, and didn’t veer much from the shoot, which is a lot more interesting to me than joking around (even though they obviously are having fun doing it).

 So, yes, I was a bit hard on the film, but now having sat through it three times (original and two extras modes), I still found it enjoyable enough to say it’s worth the Saturday night viewing with the buds.

Review: Bloody Christmas

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Bloody Christmas

Directed, produced and written by Michael Shershenovich                 
Planetworks                                     
90 minutes, 2012    
Planetworksent.com
Facebook.com/BloodyChristmas
MVDvisual.com

Christmas horror is not a new genre. It arguably goes back to the kid-friendly likes of Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964), The Christmas That Almost Wasn’t (1966) or even possibly How the Grinch Stole Christmas (1966). However, it wasn’t until the 1970s and into slasher craze of the ‘80s that we started to see Tales from the Crypt (1972; the “All Though the House” segment), Black Christmas (1974), Silent Night, Bloody Night (1974), Christmas Evil (1980), To All a Good Night (1980), Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984), Santa Claws (1996), and yes, How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000). This is a new dip in the Christmas horror pool list, but does it get candy or coal in its dripping stocking?

The main theme of the film is the loss of Christmas spirit, and the result of it. A priest, Father Michael (Robert Youngren, who has played a lot of religious leaders in his career) laments that no one is coming to his church’s Christmas service, including his staff. Rich Tague (Steve Montague, who ironically has played Hitler more than once, including a film called Ultrachrist! [2003]), the film’s main focus, is a down-on-his-luck ex-action film actor who has just been fired as a store Santa (by a character played by the director), the check cashing place won’t touch his last payment, and he’s just received an eviction notice on his trailer for back rent. His anger and frustration slowly builds in him as we see flashes of his fantasies of killing those who offend him or his sensibilities.

Meanwhile, someone is killing people in the area of Binghamton, NY, including the son of Gaylen (Geretta Geretta, who looks a lot like Donna Summers; she was in the 1985 Lamberto Bava classic, Demons, which many feel had been remade as [*Rec] in 2007). Her first scene, which opens the film, is totally out of context and a waste. The police, led by the extremely underused Detective Steinman (Robert Arensen, who has practically made a career playing cops), believes it could be a serial killer.

The killer’s identity is not really a surprise at all, but that’s okay, all things considered, as this is a thriller, not a mystery, after all. The rough edge that runs throughout, though, is that first-time director Michael Shershenovich is still in the growing pains of filmmaking. For example, the digi-camera is nearly always handheld, making for some shaky viewing (though nowhere as bad as, say, Cloverfield). There are also some rough zooms and too many mid-close-ups, rather than alternating between full- and close shots. Also, he doesn’t always get the best out of his actors. It’s as though he rarely reshoots a scene, no matter how much the dialog gets trampled. But the most egregious sin is the total lack of pacing. For a slasher pic, it’s slow and plodding, with very little action and too much pointless dialog that doesn’t really add to the story. And don’t get me started on the weak fight scene that is at the climax of the picture.e There T

The gore level is pretty small and amateurish looking, with the exception of the last gunshot, which looked great. There is no sex, but a nice nude shower scene by the incredibly named (and built) Nova Lox. Like most of the rest of the younger women in the film, she has multiple ink and piercings.

Throughout the entire picture, there is a less-than-subtle pro-Christ in Christmas message, as characters comment about commercialism, the true meaning of the holiday, and the like. Yet characters have paper (Halloween) skeletons on the wall. It’s a bit too all over the place.

Extras include interviews with some cast members, a couple of nothing deleted scenes, and a the film’s trailers.

I don’t believe Shershenovich should take this too much to heart, but use the experience and criticism to make better films. My suggestion is to take on a crew who is more experienced, and can help him along. The best way to learn is to do.

Review: Mark of the Devil

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013

Images from the Internet

Mark of the Devil: Yack Pack
Directed by Michael Armstrong
Cheezy Flicks Entertainment
96 minutes, 1970 / 2006 / 2012
Cheezyflicks.com
MVDvisual.com

This German film, originally known as Hexen bis aufs Blut gequält, is a classic in early torture porn. Obviously modeled after the increasingly sexualized Hammer Films of the time, it incorporated the ethos of the graphic violence of likes of Hershell Gordon Lewis.

Taking place in some European country - supposedly England, I believe, considering one of the characters played by Herbert Lom (d. 2012), is named Lord Chamberlain - it takes place around the 17th Century, a time of witch hunters (a role both Vincent Price and Peter Cushing played for Hammer).

Reggie Nalder

The small town that is the focal point of the film is under the thumb of the despotic local hunter, who uses his power to get what he wants, be it money, power, or sex. He needs to keep this control because he is one ugly dude. Named Albino, which strangely he is not, he has a face that was ravaged by fire (in real life) channeled by the underrated Reggie Nalder, (d. 1991), who made a career playing the heavy.

While Albino is supposed to follow Church law and have indictments and trials before the torture and executions, he just takes what he wants, and then burns anyone who he wants out of the way in an auto da fe (look it up). But his power comes under scrutiny with the arrival of said Lord Chamberlain, the governing Church-appointed witch hunter, as well as his student and an underling (who has as much morals as Albino).

Udo Kier

The student and hero of the piece, Christian (of course), is played by now-cult actor, Udo Kier, who would rise to fame just a few short years later as the star of such classics of bad cinema, Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein (1973) and Andy Warhol’s Dracula (1974). He looks much younger in this film; he was quite handsome in the two latter releases, but his blue eyes and baby face are stunningly handsome. I’m not attracted, I’m jealous.



Olivera Katarina

Catching the fancy of Albino and Christian is Vanessa, played by the very heavingly-buxomed, and actually not as pretty as Kier, the Serbian actor Olivera Katarina (last name credited as Vuco here). When Albino can’t have her, she’s declared a witch, and love-interest Christian is out to save her.

The secondary plot, which has some historical truth to it from what I remember, is that the Church gave the landed gentry who opposed the high taxes or balked at oppressive religious laws a choice: turn over their money and land to the Church, or be tortured and condemned to be killed and the Church would get their holdings anyway. That is Chamberlain’s purpose, apparently, which is a turn because at first you are led to believe that he is a savior, rather than an every worse criminal than what we are introduced to in the beginning. Whether he is out for himself or as a direct edict from the Vatican is something unexplained). This is also part of why the US Constitution has a separation of Church and State (the first government to ever do so).

It is sort of like the 1975 James Clavell novel Shogun, where the reader is introduced to the local government which has power of life and death, and then as you work your way through the society with the main occidental character, you find that they were just minuscule in reality to the larger hierarchy. The Church of those times was like that, with those in charge with absolute power (i.e., as Lord John Acton correctly posited in 1887, “…absolute power corrupts absolutely), and yet there were those more powerful above them.

I believe that while this is true, it is especially accurate when embodied by a religious order, who can justify it in their own minds as God makes right. The nastiest person I ever met was a born-again Christian who firmly believe that God wanted her to have what she wanted by any means necessary, even if it meant stabbing co-workers she didn’t like in the back (as she tried and failed with me; I guess God wanted her so bad, He had her join Him in her mid-20s via cancer – note that I believe if there is a God, there is no gender involved, so I’m just using her terminology). The Judeo-Christian West believes that Muslims are alone in their “God is Great” jihads, but Christianity (and Judaism in pre-Roman times) was just as fierce and cruel. There is a lot of injustice in the Bible, for example. Comedian Jackie Mason once stated that according to the Bible, the punishment is the same for adultery and eating non-Kosher food, to which he quipped, “I tried them both and don’t see the comparison.”

There is plenty of torture laid out for the viewer here (which is shown in the trailer, and why it is not included, as I don’t want this to be an “adult” site), including tar and feathering, burning at the stake, various mechanisms designed purely for cruelty (e.g., the thumbscrew), and in the most infamous scene, the removal of a tongue by pincers. The thing rarely talked about is that every one of the implements used is based on reality. The whole Church R&D team of that era was focused on finding ways to help the sinner confess and find God through the most gruesome means. Many are shown here. In college, I did a paper on the Spanish Inquisition, which no one unexpected, and many of the tools shown here are mentioned in detail in books about the period.

And with all this going on, there is an incredulous sappy love story that happens with gooey and tinny music played over and over as a lover’s theme, in typical European films of the time.

This is an absolute benchmark for what would become a genre that includes the likes of Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS (1975), Thriller – A Cruel Picture (1973), the whole Italian giallo (e.g., the zombie films by Fulci, and demon ones by Lamberto Bava), the abovementioned Warhol pix, and even continuing to today with the likes of the Saw and Hostel franchises, and A Serbian Film (2010). If you enjoy the genre, then this is a must for you.

There is one complaint I do have, and that’s more about the company that puts this out. Don’t get me wrong, Cheezy Flicks Entertainment re-releases some amazing period exploitative films, and I have never been sorry to see anything they’ve released. I mean, even this one actually has a replica vomit bag that was distributed when it was first released (kudos to Cheezy). However, I often find that my player had trouble reading the discs, and it tends to skip, much as it does with DVD-R recordings. I’m not sure if they’re going the cheap route or what, but it is annoying to have to keep going back to see the parts that were skipped, or to get the digital noise and stalling as the player tries to make sense of it all.

There are some cool extras here, including some retro-trailers and intermission ads that are on many of the Cheezy releases.

Review: The Color Out of Space

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012
Images from the Internet

The Color Out of Space

Directed and screenplay by Huan Yu                  
Brink Vision                                      
86 minutes, 2010 / 2012    
Brinkvision.com
Die-Farbe.com
MVDvisual.com

This is hardly the first adaptation of HP Lovecraft’s well-known 1927 short story of a meteorite hitting the earth, and the evil effects it has on a household (or community, depending on the version). Just off the top of my head, there’s Die Monster Die (1965) with Boris Karloff and Nick Adams, The Curse (1987) with Claude Akins and Wil Wheaton, and arguably the Stephen King episode of Creepshow (1982).

This version is also known as Die Farbe, or “The Color,” because this is a German production, though early parts are filmed in English, and the rest, which takes place in the Germany countryside, is in Deutsche with English subtitles.

The previous versions were generally really bad, cheesy horror films (i.e., fun), but this one has an arty-indie feel to it (i.e., not pretentious), to which the number of world-wide festival winning and nominations bend. It’s filmed in black and white, except for when the “color” appears, drenching specific objects in a purplish-pink hue.

It has been way too many years since I’ve read the original story to speak to its accuracy, so I am going to take this film on its own story merits.

In present time, a scientist who was an American soldier stationed in rural Germany at the end of Dubya-Dubya Duce, goes back there and disappears. His son investigates in the small town in which he had been, and is told by a local (and we see in a series of long and detailed flashback) how a meteorite landed in the village even before the war. The stone, however, starts to disappear / evaporate.

Soon, all the fruit in the area start to grow Monsanto size, with a weird aftertaste. Hit the hardest is the farm on which the space rock landed. Everything starts to die, the mom goes mad, everyone gets sick, and slowly the family starts to melt into lavender droplets.

Over time, this effect would have a lasting influence that… well, I’m going to stop there, because the film is worth seeing, and I don’t want to give it all away. The effects, both physical and graphic are worth seeing. The look of the film is astonishingly crisp, thanks to a home-made camera (apparently called the DRAKE) that evidently makes HD looks like 55mm film stock. While the movie is nearly completely humorless (sans a scene where a German native mocks an American’s grammar), it is also uses the contrast of light and dark to its utmost, and the digital effects are sometimes quite understated, and others a bit shocking.

The extras has a couple of the film’s trailers, the availability of subtitles in many languages, a “lost” scene, a 22-minute day-by-day making-of featurette (in German with subtitles), and a fascinating 6-1/2 minute special effects explanation that shows how they used layers of mattes so effectively. The under 7-minute “Science Horror” short is the one to really watch, as it explains a bit of the subtle ending, and tells about how Lovecraft’s story about an alien parasite has some scientific lineage.

There is little gore (certainly no more than an episode of Bones or CSI), and certainly no sex, just a good story that will keep you at attention. 

Review: Exit 101: Halloween Party Massacre

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012
Images from the Internet

  

Exit 101: Halloween Party Massacre

Directed by Doug Cole                
World Wide Multi-Media (WWMM)                       
105 minutes, 2011 / 2012  
wwmm.info/
MVDvisual.com

Sometimes a thematic cultural trend can get tiresome pretty fast, especially when it seems like it’s everywhere. But for some reason, no matter how corny or commonplace it gets, there’s something still appealing about a zombie movie, be it viral, radiation, braaaains, other fleshy bits, or just walking-and-decomposing corpses.

But the place where it is popping up the most, and is largely and lovingly touted, is in independent cinema. Lots of gore and make-up effects raise the possibility of a happy crew and cast. Whether overrun in the city or deep in the woods, a chompin’ cadaver is always welcome.

This indie film’s title place is real, making it a bit different right off the bat. Down in Cordele (renamed Lakeshear for the film), Georgia, at Exit 101 off highway 75, is the town attraction: a 15-foot Titan 1 missile frame. This is the focal point of the film, the hub where the action emanates.

We meet a group of (too old to really be) high school students whose hangout is at the missile’s site, where apparently in 1969, a failed secret military formula was hidden in the projectile. Of course, our noble drawling clique finds it a few days before Halloween, and on a dare, the green fluid is downed by intrepid Caleb (Joseph Lavender, who also wrote and produced the film).

The bunch of bananas includes the power couple of the cute dumb girl Stacey (Kasey Stewart) and the football player Blake (Dennis Proulx) who is a bit of a bully, the cool goth/punk girl Erica (the smokin’ Raina Ashley Strickland), the weird-nerd Colin (Sebastian Gruber), the hip token black guy Reggie (Devin Ray), the plain girl Sarah (Cassandra Johnson, who is married to Lavender in the real world) who is secretly in love with Caleb (i.e., she’s the heroine), and then there’s Caleb, who’s the slacker.

As Caleb slowly “turns” over the days, between blinding headaches for which he doesn’t think to see a doctor, he starts to eat raw packaged chopped meat and doing in a wayward pizza delivery boy as a bite, for starters.

Did I mention that this is a comedy? Thankfully not on the bad pun level of, say, ThanksKilling (2009), but rather more of a humor flavor throughout. Parts of this film was incredibly effective. There is one great scene, for example, where some rednecks meet pizza boy and things turn nasty. The three actors playing the back woods trailer trash just nail it.

Of course, our likable yet not overly bright group and the growing number of zombies are destined to converge at the big high school costume party in the woods, where blood, gore and humor come to a head.

The mentioned gristle is mostly fine, with an occasionally too thick blood to look real, but it’s excusable considering how much works well.

The extras are a gag reel that’s amusing in some parts (especially the rednecks ad-libing). The making-of doc is occasionally interesting. As for the commentary, it’s director Cole and writer Lavender. They vary from fascinating when they are on topic of the production information to a tad talking over each other. The only real annoyance is that Cole is too close to the mic so you can hear him breathing through his nose, and Lavender is occasionally too far from the mic, so he’s hard to hear.

But it’s the film that the important thing, and luckily that is well done and worthwhile.
 

Review: Johnny Dickie’s Slaughter Tales

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013
Images from the Internet

Johnny Dickie’s Slaughter Tales
Directed by Johnny Dickie             
Briarwood Entertainment / Libra Verde Media               
91 minutes, 2012    
Briarwoodentertainment.com
MVDvisual.com

You may not know this, but in the late 1960s to mid-1980s, in the pre-video days when film was expensive, some of the better known directors of the time got their experience and hands-on training by making porno films. Yep, the industry hired students from NYU and UCLA film schools who were inexpensive to use and in need of practice, plus cash to pay for the university. For anyone in their younger years back then, there was always 8mm and Super 8 film, which was incredibly hard to work with, as I found out in the couple of movies I tried to make with a friend.

This changed a bit with video and the camcorder, but tapes were still hard to edit, needing a linear editing bay which was expensive. Of course, now with the digital age and most new computers having relatively advanced editing programs, it is not surprising to find that more and more are making films independently to various successes, such as Bill Zebub, Creep Creepersin, Dustin Mills and Sean Weathers.

Nearly fifteen-year-old Johnny Dick uses a digi-cam to shoot his stories, and then transferred it to VHS to give it a true grainy texture to produce a first-time full-length feature. Is it good? Nah. Is it fun? Oh, yeah, if you can just set your mind to remember that it’s a film by a kid in middle school.

As a framework, Johnny, who also stars in the film, steals a videotape with the same name as this one from a store (one of the only parts outside his house other than a brief rooftop scene). Despite a ghostly warning, he decides to watch the tape anyway. While this is not a new concept, from Ringu (1998) to the new release V/H/S (2012), it’s certainly underused more than, say, the found tape subgenre that is so overdone.

We watch with Johnny as different stories unfold, all of them starring, well, Johnny. There are a couple of other actors here and there, but he’s in the large majority. Between the anthology, the viewer sees Johnny commenting on what a piece of shit the videotape is, and in fact, at one point, he even wears a tee-shirt that says “This movie is terrible.”

Mostly there is nothing drastically original or shocking in the film other than watching a teen constantly cursing and talking repeatedly about “skin mags.” And yet, of the three or four of the other actors, most who also multi-role, Johnny is actually the best one.

Part of the fun is that often for props, he uses severed limbs you buy in a store at Halloween, or just obviously molded clay (not sure if it’s PlayDoh or the real deal). There is also some cool pixilated animation with worm-like creatures that work pretty well. Remember, Raimi did the same thing at the end of Evil Dead (1981). Lest I forget, there’s the old Alka Seltzer as rabid-mouth trick that is always effective.

Oh, and mucho kudos on a very fun cameo by Toxie’s dad at the end! Oh, stay tuned for the scenes through the final credit, if you made it that far.

As a side note, I want to say that I really enjoyed the cramped and sometimes messy space in which the film was recorded (i.e., Johnny’s parents’ place). There is media everywhere, from rows and rows of books and DVDs, and lots of shelves of LPs. Ah, I could nearly smell the vinyl… And then there is the changing length of Johnny’s hair throughout (it took two years to shoot this). At one point towards the end you can actually see the shadow of the camera and tripod. I’m just sayin’.

If I was to make any fatherly advice to Johnny about a change, it would be to get some kind of help with the dialog. For example, if I made a drinking game out of every time he said “Oh my fucking God,” I would be lifeless from alcohol poisoning. Hell, Jerry Lee Lewis would be dead of it. But the second conversation between Johnny and the tape’s spirit in the bathroom is hysterical. More like that, please.

But my biggest piece of suggestion would be to keep going. Continue making films, because this experience will probably prove to be invaluable. One learns through crap and adversity, to partially paraphrase philosopher Johnny Dewey. I would like to add that I also hope that rather than release a flood of films, he will do them carefully one by one, because thinking about the productions are as important as the filming itself.  

Extra include 2 trailers for this film (one without the “camcorder effect,” which is truthfully much better, though I understand the idea Johnny was trying to posit. There is also a couple of minutes long behind the scenes called ”Making an American Nightmare” that shows a couple of scenes being filmed, and an 11-minute featurette titled “The Effects of Slaughter Tales.” This is an interesting sort-of how-to for new filmmakers. Yes, there is also a full-length commentary with Johnny and a couple of friends who discuss the filming in surprising detail, despite the goofy tone, so I can suggest a listen.

Listen, this truly is a case of Buyer Beware. It’s a film made by a kid mostly in his living room. If you’re willing to accept that, and know what you’re getting, you may be surprised by how much you laugh. I look forward to seeing more of Johnny’s output as he grows both physically and aesthetically.
 

Review: Bloody Bloody Bible Camp

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

Bloody Bloody Bible Camp

Directed by Vito Trabucco             

Bosko Group                                    

90 minutes, 2012    

Boskogroup.com

Bloodybloodybiblecamp.com

MVDvisual.com

So, you may ask, just how irreverent is this group in the woods slasher spoof? Well, if you need more information than just the title, the assembly visiting the Happy Day Bible Camp are from St. Judas Catholic Church. And if that doesn’t get ya yet, a very snarky Jesus is played by… wait for it… Ron Jeremy.

As the extended opening credits roll by bit by bit, we meet the first set of ill-fated horndogs coming to share the weekend with beer, sex and the savior in 1977. The body count in just this segment, as they meet insane killer (obviously a guy in a nun’s outfit and a mask), Sister Mary Chopper (Tim Sullivan), is larger than most serious films of this nature, but are equally as gruesome, via various sharp objects (my favorite being the crucifix with the knife on the end).

The ’77 scenes are smartly funny, with one oaf commenting how Star Wars is going to bomb, another discusses the death of Elvis, and everyone is wearing loud-colored polyester. But mostly it’s heavenly profane in language and deed. For example, one woman states, “It would be only Christian of us, good girls of us, to have sex with guys who have penises like Jesus.” That is not a misquote. Another, splayed and ready for rear entry, states lustily, “Backdoor’s always open for Jesus, baby.”  Oh, and someone with a guitar sings a folk ditty that includes the lyrics, “If the devil don’t like this / he can lick my nutsack.”

I wrote down a whole bunch of the lines from this part, but on second thought, I don’t want to stomp on all of them, better if you see it for yourself. And all this is, remember, just the credits.

As the main story begins in 1984, a new set of fodder heads off (pun intended) in a yellow bus to the Happy Day Bible Camp (filmed in Big Bear, California). They are led by the sexual-orientation questioning Father Cummings (yes, sometimes the puns get that obvious), played by horror film stalwart, Reggie Bannister, who rose to fame in the Phantasm (1979) franchise. He also co-produced the film.

Along with him is the obvious bunch of mid-to-late-twenty-year-old teens, including the punk girl Jessie (Deborah Venegas), the dumb blonde, Britany (Jessie Sonneborn), the fat and mentally challenged Timmy (Christopher Raff), the possibly closeted bully/jock Tad (Matthew Aiden), the horny-yet-inexperienced Vance (Troy Guthrie), and the sole survivor of the ’77 attack, Millie (Ivet Corvea). Also along for the ride is another member of the clergy, Brother Zeke (Jay Fields), who is also not adverse to a jump in the sack).

Of course, before they get to the place, they have to stop off at the store so they can be warned by one of the locals (yep, every cliché), who is annoyed by the “goddamn Christians” (more on this later).

There are some particular moments that stand out for me, such as a… well, I’m not sure if it’s a rip-off or a rip-on Blazing Saddles’ (1974) “Whip this out” moment. And I certainly smiled when one character firmly states, “Someone’s going to H-E-L. That’s Hell.”  What made me laugh about this is not the misspelling, but that they explain it to the audience in case they missed it.

It is pretty obvious which character is Sister Mary Chopper; this film obviously does not feel a need for subtly, which is fine by me. I’m not here to watch Monk or The Mentalist, where the viewer tries to work out the mystery, but rather a spoof. While not as slick (i.e., lower budget) as, say, the Scary Movie (2000) satire series, it is successful in its own right that I laughed though a lot of it, while “oh no, they didn’t”-ing in others. The main problem with this film is that it straddles between a satire and a broad comedy, seemly not really sure on which side to focus. But I have to say, on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the most annoying, it is somewhere around a 1.5, so no harm, lots of foul fun.

There are multiple good death effects and blood, with some causes being sharp objects or bricks dropped on heads. My favorite one, though, is when one character is nailed to a door frame exactly like the mom at the end of the film Carrie (1976). Hey, spoofs usually riff off other films, and this one does it well.

I’m sure there will be those who say this release is part of the “War on Catholics / Christianity.” Yes, I will agree that this film slams some of the ills of the modern Church, such as one male character being tapped on the shoulder, to which he joyfully says, “What, Father, again?” The Catholic Church especially has opened itself up to specific cultural ridicule for the way it has handled certain situations (e.g., I remember being in Canada in the late 1980s and there was an article that investigated that a large number of the priests and brothers on Newfoundland were transferred there after hidden scandals involving pedophilia).

But honestly, I believe (pun intended) that this crew was going for shock value, rather than trying to make a point. How I imagine the writing sessions is something like: “Is that offensive? Yeah, throw it in!” Besides, there is always going to be somebody offended about something. I remember nearly getting into a fistfight with some tool because he insisted that the titular character in Monty Python’s The Life of Brian (1979) was supposed to be Jesus; I commented that JC appears in the film so how can Brian be Him? That’s when he threatened to take me outside and deck me.  No telling what he thought of Saved! (2004).

While this film does occasionally become a bit too broad for its own good, as a whole, it is definitely a mucho grande fun excursion into, well, one character puts it best: “That’s, like, blasphemy or something!”

There are some enjoyable extras, such as “The Making of a Massacre” (13 minutes), a production photo slide show, and some trailers. Two less successful ones are the dull 12-minute long “Bloody Bloody Special Effects” that shows two talking head guys discussing the SFX in a static manner (go figure), and the feature-length commentary is so overcrowded with director, cast and crew, that there is no coherency, no way to tell who is saying what, and is basically a muddled mess. This film is worth getting on its own, fortunately, so go do that, my child.