Review: The Inhabitants

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2016

Images from the Internet

The Inhabitants: Standard Edition

Written and directed by the Rasmussen Brothers (Michael and Shawn)

Lascaux Media / Sinister Siblings Films /
Film Rise / MVD Visual

90 minutes, 2015 / 2016

www.mvdvisual.com

I love when a title has a cool double or even triple entendre to it. As an example, this one works quite well, and I’ll get to that in a sec.

Michael and Shawn Rasmussen, who apparently like to be known as “The writers of John Carpenter’s The Ward” (2010),” also wrote and directed this one, the second feature for which they sat in the main chair(s). The outcome is a different vision when you can make the whole film you write, so this gives them some freedom of self-expression.

                                                                  

This was filmed at the Noyes-Parris House (built in 1669), somewhere in a wooded suburban area of Wayland, MA, approximately 30 miles due west from Salem. The Heritage Home, which doubles for the March Carriage B&B here, actually has an historical, sinister connection to the infamous witch trials, giving some credibility to the look and tone of the film.

Elise Couture Stone

Into the picture come Dan (Michael Reed) and Jessica (Elise Couture Stone), a young couple who buy the mysterious B&B from its previous owner (Judith Chaffee), a widow who has been sinking into senility. Pretty early on – enough towards the beginning I don’t feel like I’ve giving away anything – we learn that the house was originally owned by a woman named Lydia (India Pearl), a witch who was hanged in – yep – 1669. Needless to say, she hasn’t exactly vacated the premises, and has found ways to create a family writ large.

If you watch the trailer, which gives away too much of the story, pretty soon you know wifey is under Lydia’s spell; this spells (pun intended) trouble for just about anyone and everyone. So, this brings me to the point I mentioned earlier about the entendre: are the Inhabitants the earthly ones living in the house, the supernatural ones lingering (as the band Sparks might sing), or the supernatural one inside the living one? Gotta say, whichever way, it works.

India Pearl

The premise itself is hardly new, and I even predicted most of the ending about a third of the way through: been there, seen that. That being said, and this is a big however, the Brothers Rasmussen have taken an old motif and really worked it like kneading a raisin challah. The end result is quite delicious, even if you’ve eaten that kind before.

                  

There are some really nice jump scares, but that is due to both the surprise and a lot to the make-up, which is really top notch Lydia and the others look just plain free-kaaay, with the wide, white eyes. Again, I’ve seen this so many times before, but the look and lighting works so well together to make it pop. I admit freely that ghost stories have always been my favorites; spookies + body count = happiness, for me. That does not mean that all of this genre are good, but this one certainly is better than most I’ve seen recently.

Michael Reed

The acting is also quality work. For example, Reed has never disappointed, even in outrageous roles (e.g., The Disco Exorcist [2011]). If I recall correctly, he may be using his own jacket because I could have sworn I’ve seen the (faux) fur-color thing before. But I digress… Here, as the husband who is trying to work out what the hell is happening to his life-partner while still trying to maintain his own space in the house, he comes across as both strong and flawed. Couture is the centerpiece of the film, as the wife who is dealing with a supernatural assault. She gets to play the role in two modes, being a loving wife for the first half, and then nearly as a somnambulist as she is influenced by the evil being living in her home. As the evil Lydia, the lovely Pearl dons the fright make-up and goes full throttle as the wicked witch of Wayland. Her scenes are short, but she makes her presence (pun intended) known to the viewer.

My complaint about the film, as I stated before, is that the trailer gives away too much, so I recommend seeing the film instead. But that note is a minor chord, as the film really is a fun watch, from beginning to end. While there is little character development, you do get the impression that the couple love each other, and you feel the ominousness almost from the gecko (yes, I know it’s “get-go”). Plus the effects are also enjoyable; the blood is not plentiful (and rightfully so for the story), and also seems to have the right consistency, i.e., doesn’t ooze like chocolate syrup.

The house, the lighting, the editing, the acting and the story all work together to create a totally enjoyable ghostie. By “Standard Version,” as this release is called, I am assuming means that it is CD rather than Blu-Ray, and perhaps has less extras, but that’s okay, as it still packs quite a punch.

Part of the reason why this is such a fun flick, as I’ve mentioned before, is the pacing of the film. What I mean by that is the Bros. don’t fall into the trap that many do: normally, I really hate the whole walking cautiously through the dark house / basement / cellar / woods / scenes with a flashlight (or candle, depending on the film), in what feels like an endless padding of time. The suspense is kept in play because it’s done in short segments. Also, it’s not so dark that all you can see is whatever the light falls upon, nor is it a shaky camera, for once; thank you for that. Makes me forgive you for (please read the rest of the sentence in a Maxwell Smart voice) the old moving-the-bathroom-cabinet-mirror-and-suddenly-the-ghost-is -behind-the-person trick.  

Other than chapters, the only extras are two different types of sound and subtitles (always appreciated).

This is one of the better indie films I’ve seen this year. The Rasmussens have taken some tired and tried ideas and actually improved them to the point where I didn’t feel, really?! That is actually saying a lot. Go and check it out. A great Halloween watch.

Review: Normal

Text by Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films
Images from the Internet

Normal
Directed by Richard Griffin
Scorpio Films Releasing
89 Minutes, 2013
www.scorpiofilmsreleasing.com
https://www.facebook.com/NORMALTHEMOVIE

And it is no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

2 Corinthians 11:14

Many directors it seems, especially ones known for releases generally having some level of humor, at some point want to make a “serious” movie. Most, such as Woody Allen with Interiors (1978), are arguably not successful (it was a beautiful film that critics loved, but it bored audiences). Director Richard Griffin had tried this before with much more success with his bleak, black and white noir thriller Exhumed (2011), which I rated as the best indie film I had seen that year.



Sarah Nicklin and Michael Reed

Taking a step into even darker material – albeit this time in color – Griffin once again joins forces with his Exhumed leads Sarah Nicklin and Michael Reed, only this time with Reed as the focal point rather than Nicklin. But as with most films that pair them, they are some form of a couple, such as in The Disco Exorcist (2011).
Let me say, as a straight Ally, Reed is one handsome fella. Luckily, he does not really need to rely merely on that as he is also one damn fine actor. He plays Jim, who owns a run-down apartment building in Boston (he even drives past the Citgo sign, giving me fond memories of The Rat[skeller] club, but I digress…), apparently co-owned with his brother, Tom (Nathaniel Sylva giving a solid and emotional performance). Jim is also the not so handy superintendent, unsuccessfully able to fix fluttering hallway lights or thermostats, thematically matching his mind and moods, perhaps. Now, his brother is pressuring him to sign away the building to be sold for his own – yet understandable – reasons we come to learn. So, poor Tom is feeling quite some pressure in his life.



Elyssa Baldassarri and Michael Reed

Along with his brother, there is also strain from a number of the tenants who desperately seem to want something of – not just from – him through some form of affection and attention, including both genders (yes I know gender is more than binary, but let’s move on). Through flashbacks and verbal hints, the viewer learns some of the key secrets of the story at the end of the first act, but that certainly should not have you give up, but rather put a little additional jam on the toast, if you will, because the ride is just getting more interesting.

The tenants and a couple of visitors are part of what makes this film so… disturbingly curious. For example, there’s Reed’s companion who often comes and goes named Shelley, played by the amazing… Sarah Nicklin. That pause is because I was going to call her a Scream Queen, but honestly, you can tell she can play beyond the genre. Let me further say, as a straight Ally, Nicklin is an attractive woman. I’ve seen a few of her films, and when she and Reed have scenes together, there is definite magic as they play off each other so well.

The mysterious Michael Thurber

There is also a married couple (Monica Saviolakis and Rich Tretheway, who just keeps getting better in every film I see him in), two women who almost remind me of the twins from The Shining (1980), amusingly named April and June (Samantha Acampora  and Shannon Hartman, respectively), the older man who has a crush on Jim (David Erin Wilson), and a woman constantly on the verge of a nervous breakdown (Elyssa Baldassarri, also giving an extremely strong performance somewhere between pathos and scarred; I’m looking forward to seeing her first lead role in Griffin’s latest, Accidental Incest: The Musical, which was just released, and soon to be reviewed here). Then, of course, there is the mysterious stranger, sharply portrayed by Griffin regular, Michael Thurber. Thurber can sometimes be over the top when he should be, in comedies like Future Justice(2014), Dr. Frankenstein’s Wax Museum of the Hungry Dead (2013) or The Sins of Dracula (2014), but when he hunkers down to serious roles like here and Exhumed, man, is he a force to reckon with.

Samantha Acampora

Griffin’s sense of the scene, placement of the camera, lighting, and mood are impeccable. There’s one shot of Tom leaving a bar with the soon to be full frontal Patrick Keefe, which is so well done, I actually backed it up to watch three or four times, with each viewing I noticing something different. From the dull, yellowish lighting to one that is bright and glaringly stark white to show, again, state of mind, the direction is nearly a character in itself.

While the symbolism runs higher than usual, unlike with, say, Interiors, it never gets in the way of the story, a fault that tends to run in those trying to make “art” instead of a good film. There is a reason why so many quality actors flock to and then stick around for other Griffin films, because (a) it really looks like they are supported by the director, (b) the roles are juicy as get-out, and (c) he makes quality films. There is no other director I know who is this prolific (18 full features and a few shorts in 11 years) and retains the high level of quality.

Helping along of course is the writer, Lenny Schwartz, who has penned a couple of Griffin’s other films, including the above mentioned Accidental Incest. Schwartz has a very sharp sense of humor, a touch of the deranged, and knows how to tell a story. I mean, if he can give away key plot points a third of the way through and still not have it be anti-climactic, that really is saying tons.

One would be hard pressed to call this a splatterfest, and blood is kept to a minimum, but its presence is more meaningful than your average killer film, but that’s because Normal delves us ore into what makes one do terrible things, and yet manages to keep us in suspense, as a thriller should.

As usual, Schwartz and Griffin play with cultural gender roles, with no character necessarily being 100% anything other than themselves,  and giving the audience enough credit to accept that. As it should be. Just playing with the theme of what is normal and what is “not” can be taken on many levels here. Sure, there is the mental question, but where does that line fall, and more importantly, who is to say what is “normal?” Greenwich Village? Indiana? Fangoria? Me?  

There are a bunch of points I would love to discuss about the ending here, but won’t for obvious reasons. Let’s have some tea, and we can talk.

Review: The Disco Exorcist

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

           

The Disco Exorcist

Directed by Richard Griffin                

Wild Eye Films, 2011

80 minutes, USD $16.95        

wildeyereleasing.com

MVDvisual.com

It seems the whole retro exploitation movement came into full fruition with the Tarantino / Rodriguez double-billed Grindhouse (2007), with fake period pieces added, digital scratches to look old, and “missing scenes” taken out. Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the genre, out comes The Disco Exorcist.
 

Despite the obvious comparison to the previous film(s) mentioned, The Disco Exorcist is, well, amazingly enjoyable. Director Richard Griffin has a history of making horror films of various genres, occasionally with a retro feel. He has certainly hit the pin on the voodoo doll head with this one.

Taking place in 1979, at the height of the disco era and just as it was starting to thankfully wane (to be replaced by the equally noxious hip hop), there are three main characters around whom the plot revolves, each with less than subtle character names.
 

First, there is the title fellow, otherwise known as Rex Romanski (i.e., king of romance). He’s sort of like John Revolta / Tony Monero from Saturday Night Fever (1977), who dances and then subsequently beds all the women, and then moves on to the next one with no thought of hurt feelings. He leaves a string of women who sit at the dance club watching him move while bitterly (and humorously) make snide comments like a rejected Greek chorus. Donning a ‘70s style long-haired wig and full of baby blue eyes and dimples, Michael Reed plays him almost as an innocent, rather than the pig Rex actually acts. Without malice of thought, Romanski just lives his life, which just happens to involve disco, dipping and dumping. His sidekick, Manuel (Brandon Luis Aponte, taking a fun turn), is rarely from his side, even when he’s in a porn theater – er – touching himself, watching his favorite actress perform.

At the club, he meets the edgy, sometimes beautiful / sometimes scary Rita Marie (a derivative of the name Miriam – Moses’ sister – Marie means “Bitter”… yes, I just knew that off the top of my head; Rita, a derivative of Margarita; is a pearl… that one I looked up). We see from the first scene that there is something wrong with Rita, who has more power than she can use wisely, and rather takes her anger issues out by… well, you’ll have to see the cool period aesthetics. Ruth Sullivan, a consummate actor actually, does just the right amount of scenery chewing for this role, which calls for a lot of hysterics, yearning, burning, and literal finger-pointing.

Lastly, there is Rex’s idol and eventual lover, porn star Amoreena Jones (as in Amore). Beautiful with pouty lips, Sarah Nicklin is fearless in her role as the focus of Rita’s jealous vengeance. This is another part that could have been dismissed by an actor of less caliber, and cheapened by the action, but Nicklin actually comes out the best of the three as far as skills go – and that’s saying a lot considering the amount of talent is actually present despite the budget – not by doing her “Linda Blair” bit of being possessed, but by her comic timing and treating this as a she might, say, The Godfather (yeah, okay, that was a weird comparison, but hopefully I made my point). Oh, as a sidebar, in the real world, the leads Nicklin and Reed are married, so some of the positions they assume were “familiar,” as they state in the commentary.

All three of these actors are part of the New England theater scene (as are most of the secondary and ancillary cast), and Griffin, from the area himself, filmed much of this in Pawtucket, RI, as he does with most of his releases. As such, the three are part of his stable of on-screen (and quite some behind-the-scenes, as well) talent, having all appeared in a number of his flicks.

I must say, that as a retro film that was supposed to look like it was released at the end of the ‘70s, Griffin does take it a bit too far. For example, in that period, you never saw male genitalia, unless it was a rubber dildo. Even then, unless it was someone like Russ Meyer, it was highly unusual, and no theater (other than pornos) would have shown it, unless, of course, it was Meyers, an even rarer exception, and yet only in some major cities. Even with female nudity, it was T&A, but no genital hair for a long time. The one exception I can think of, though, is the actually boring The Harrad Experiment (1973), where we got to see Don Johnson’s – er – johnson.

Going in that direction for a moment, it is interesting to note that part of the this excursion into dat ol’ tyme exploitation horror, there is a set piece involving the filming of a porno film (stolen, in part, by the faaabulous scenester and collector – IMDB refers to his “paranormal artifacts, murderabilia, sideshow exhibits and downright weird stuff” –  Babette Bombshell, who also designed the hexilious voodoo doll). I bring this up because recently, I reviewed the re-release of the mostly expunged Gum (1976) [HERE], at the correlation between the two is remarkable, including cheezy sets and lack of acting (although this would become especially true when porn switched from film to video in the ‘80s).

Also, check out the commentary, consisting of director Griffin, actors Nicklin and Reed, and producer Ted Marr. Usually, when you have that many people doing the annotation, it gets muddled and people talk over each other, but here, not only do they respectfully let each other have their say, but what they say is relevant to the film. Plus they still keep it humorous, again indicating that it was an enjoyable shoot for them, which passes on to the viewer.

I gotta say that this was a hell of a hoot (pun intended) to watch, and I recommend it to those who are not offended by body parts, both attached and un-. And, in the meanwhile, I look forward to seeing the sequel, The Brother of the Disco Exorcist,  listed as turning its head in 2013.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AzmGeZOss5o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>