Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films,
2018
Images from the Internet
Him (aka The Devil’s Warehouse)
Directed by Luis Rodriguez
Wownow
Entertainment / Delinquent Films / Blue Diamond Pictures / MVD Visual
85
minutes, 2016 / 2018
Two
quick aside musings before I delve in, and that is regarding the relationship
between the film and the 2017 release of Stephen King’s IT, which was popular in the cinema recently, not to mention a
cultural phenomenon; no, not with the story,
but the zeitgeist of it all. This is mostly presumption on my part in that I
don’t really know the facts one way or the other, but I’m a-gonna take a stab
(pun intended) at it.
This
film was originally released in 2016 as The
Devil’s Warehouse, before the re-adaptation of the King novel. Rather, I believe Him’s creation was more a combination of the popularity of the likes
of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre franchise,
and perhaps even a bit of Captain Spaulding in the Rob Zombie House of 1000 Corpses (2003) and The Devil’s Rejects (2005) releases,
mixed together with all the online videos of weird evil clown sightings all
over the U.S.
That
being said, I have total belief that the rerelease
of this film in 2018, and especially the way it is retitled as Him, is completely related to the
popularity of last year’s It. And,
y’know what, I don’t have a problem with a reissue jumping on the wagon of a
remake, and believe it to be a smart marketing move. Indie films truly need
what help they can get!
Presenting
a mostly Latino cast (felicitaciones!),
the film’s prologue centers around a gringo
businessman named Pearson (Paul Westbrook, who also wrote the music), who is
definitely not having a good stretch. His home and car are being repossessed,
and he’s losing his warehouse, where employees are leaving in droves anyway
because of strange noises and laughs heard in darkened corners. In a second
prologue that takes place a year later – and two months before the main story –
two buxom young women showing mucho grande cleavage as often as possible (thank
you) keep finding a Ouija board at the beach (?!). I’m not quite sure what this
has to do with the main story, but there ya go.
One
thing we quickly learn is that the focus of the haunting of the warehouse is,
yes, a clown from (I guess, literally) hell, but this could have been as much
based on the Annabelle (2014)
franchise as the King book/film(s), due to an army of mysterious dolls that pop
in and out, and not to mention a nod to Grave
Encounters 2 (2012).
In
the main part of the tale, six “paranormal investigators” – purely amateurs,
I’m guessing, from their lack of scientific equipment, other than flashlights;
though one is perhaps psychic – split evenly between men and women, break into
the now long-deserted warehouse, where the sun never shines, but the hand-held
LCD lights do. In other words, the film is literally dark, and sometimes hard
to see, other than the bouncy spotlights.
Now,
I know that the director has made a number of films, both shorts and
full-length features over the past decade or so, but this truly looks, feels
and practically tastes like a college class film. It may be because the cast
has so few credits, but much of the acting is woodenly sketchy too often, and
the writing is clumsy (“we’re paranormal in-VES-tigators!” is said more than
once).
This
sextet are anxious to see anything paranormal (a word that comes up very
often), daring whatever spirits are there to make themselves known, but the
second a doll shows up, they’re all scared shitless one moment, angry the next,
and ready to blame each other for disappearances at the drop of a suggestion of
anything actually happening. Yet, when they find a pool of blood after someone
goes absent, they discuss what’s going on rather than trying to get the hell
outta there. Their reactions are just too inconsistent.
Speaking
of blood, etc., there is more cleavage than gore (again, thank you, even though
no nudity, even with a shower scene); in fact, there is no real anything
happening as far as contact other than grabbing. I’m not sure what this was
rated, but I’m guessing PG-13 at best. Georgie’s stump in the opening act of IT has more viscera than anything here.
And the languid pace, the darkness, the questionable editing (such as the group
describing a body being dragged as it happens, before we get to see it, seemingly
added in later), the stilted dialog, and the acting all work at not enticing its audience (i.e., in this
case, me). There isn’t even a good jump scare. The clown does look cool, though;
however, it does not resemble the box cover at all, which is actually fine as I
like them both.
For
me the biggest problem though is that I have no idea why the dolls, why the young
evil girl, why the clown, etc. There
are too many either unanswered or unclarified reasons for the events we are
witnessing. In other words, it’s too abstract for clarity.
Now,
this could have easily have been a found footage flick, but thankfully, the
director chose another direction. For that, I am grateful. The attractive cast
is also a plus.
The
only extra is the chapter breakdowns, which are text with no images. Speaking
of images, the last shot of the clown in the film looks like it was taken from
somewhere in the middle, and strategically placed by the distribution company near
the end so it can be the last image before the title of the film, again
cementing the “we put this out to cash in on the new blockbuster.” But, you
know what? Once again, I’m fine with it.
