Showing posts with label Yeti. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yeti. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 20, 2019

Review: MOMO: The Missouri Monster


Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2019
Images from the Internet


MOMO: The Missouri Monster
Directed by Seth Breedlove
Small Town Monsters
82 minutes, 2019

The Mothman of Point Pleasant; the Beast of Whitehall; the Flatwoods Monster; the Bray Road Beast; the Thunderbirds… These, among others, have two commonalities. First of all, they are local monsters like Bigfoot that have people talking about after sightings in regional woods or in the skies. The other is that each is represented in a film by Seth Breedlove.

His latest focus is the Missouri Monster known as Momo, a tall and hairy creature with glowing bug eyes. Oh, and three toes, did I mention that? Supposedly it was seen in the woods scaring the local populace of the riverfront town of Louisiana, MO at Marzolf Hill, in 1972. As the name of Breedlove’s film company states, they are interested in Small Town Monsters, and focus on that. I’m all in as cryptozoology is something akin to oral culture as film recordings tend to be rare of these beasties.

But Breedlove takes it a step further and gives the viewer not just a documentary, but a hybrid of documentary and a recently shot narrative that supposed to be from a 1975 cheesy film about the topic at hand. Y’know that film supposedly of Bigfoot walking through the forest that is obviously fake? It’s kinda like that, but with more fun and cheapness thrown in. It’s the kind of film you may have watched on VHS back in the day, with its grainy look and man-in-hairy-suit motif, but more on that later.

Lyle Blackburn
In other words, in it’s interesting style where there are three layers to this: first, we are presented with a “reality television show” called “Blackburn’s Cryptid Casefiles,” where a the host, Lyle Blackburn (playing himself, a real Bigfoot and other exotic creatures expert, writer and musician from Texas) is the wraparound story segueing into other layers as Lyle is shot from several angles though he mostly seems to be looking away from the camera while only looking at one of them. The second is the imaginary 1975 film, and the third is the documentary part where the “real” story lies. This is an appealing meta-look at the events at hand. It gives the director some freedom to “exaggerate” the narrative to make it less “talking heads” and overly dramatize the events.

Out of nowhere though, about halfway through, a new element is added, namely UFOs. Okay, maybe not flying saucers, but definitely lights in the skies that occurred the same time, which the filmmakers of the 1975 film and Blackburn’s show connect them into a creature that comes from the sky via these floating luminaries.

I’d like to break this down into two sections, namely the “1975 film” and the documentary parts. For the “previously unreleased film,” Breedlove takes his – err – love of exploitation cinema and presents us with a really cheesily amusing creature (aka the guy in the hairy suit, played by Ken Rose, who musta been sweating like crazy in that abominable thing… see what I did there?) and an absurd, over-the-top story with some really (purposefully I’m assuming) wooden acting that was quite common in those days in the indie film market (and quite often even today, and not just as an homage as is this one).

This fantastical film breaks up the talking heads of the documentary and keeps the story moving along and, as I said before, it especially works because of that. Also, anyone who lived through those early VHS days and are fans of these kinds of things will be joyous about it. For most of this part, the camera has a filter on it do give it that worn, speckled film look, though other parts don’t, and it looks a bit odd being that digital clear rather than cheap film fuzzy. But actually, I’m grateful too much attention wasn’t focused in that way because I remember how hard it was to see night scenes back in the day, and the viewer can make out what is happening here. For that, I’m grateful.

As for the documentary part, there are interviews with a half dozen or so residents of Louisiana at the time (senior citizens now), some of whom scoff at the story while still reliving it for the camera, and others who realize the importance in local history. Their stories are fun and interesting, and just the right touch of cynical in some cases. What was missing was a living member of the Harrison family that is the focus of much of the sightings to talk about what happened to them, or at least an explanation of why they were not on camera in the form of Blackburn’s retelling. Personally, if I was part of the government of the town, I would put up a monument or billboard, and use it as a tourist attraction because there are more people into cryptozoology than one might guess (Area 51, is an example).

Bigfoot stories, even those who may have come from the skies and have three toes, are fun. The fear of big hairy beasties living in the woods – even those who haven’t been seen in 40 years or so – is as palpable as, say, sharks or killer insects. This is true even though Momo never actually hurt anyone.

Breedlove has hit a different formula for his retelling of local legends, and the stories are improved by that. I’m not sure if this will become more standardized for him, or a one-off, but I certainly enjoy what I’ve seen of his series about creatures that may or may not exist in local legends. Hopefully, that will go on.





Friday, August 10, 2018

Review: Abominable (Special Edition)

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2018
Images from the Internet


Abominable (Special Edition)
Directed by Ryan Schifrin
Red Circle Productions / MVD Rewind Collection
94 minutes, 2006 / 2018

Some form of the Sasquatch, or big foot, has been the subject of horror films for so many films over a span of decades that it could easily be classified as a sub-genre on its own; for example, there is another film called Abominable due out in 2019, which features an animated and kid-friendly Yeti. Personally, I feel the reason for the proliferation of this monster is a move that mixes the mystery of the dark and dangerous woods and a bit of the werewolf motif, i.e., a creature that is not normalized in culture (such as a lion, or wolf), but still human-line and… possible. Director Schifrin also points out during the commentary that  the Bigfoot is one of the few well known monsters that is not under copyright. More times than not – okay, nearly always – the beastie is a guy in suit (including here), which is okay with me because it depends on how it looks and how it’s used that matters.

This re-release version of the 2006 film is a two-disc combination of Blu-ray and DVD, both discs identical with one exception which I’ll get to in the next paragraph. For point-of-reference, I only put in the Blu-ray disc.

Right off, there is an option for an 8:35 minute contemporary introduction by the director, Ryan Shifrin, who discusses how the film was taken from its original format and made into 2K HD from the original camera negative, with some extra production values (e.g., redoing the CGI glowing eyes). For this reason, there is both the original and HD version available on the Blu-ray disc only, hence the two-disc difference.

Matt McCoy
Starting the film, there is a prologue about some scared farmers, namely Dee Wallace Stone, who I think of more in The Howling than the overrated ET, and veteran character actor whom you’d recognize in a sec, Rex Linn (that’s just the start of the many cameos, but I’ll get to that later, too). After, we are introduced to the protagonist, Preston, played by Matt McCoy who most people probably remember from many television appearances, but to me he’ll always be Lloyd Braun (“Seinfeld”). After an mountain climbing accident that cost him his wife and the use of his legs, he has now returned to a cabin he owns in a wooded area, doing the Jimmy Stewart / Rear Window thing, seeing all through a window with binoculars. He’s caught on that there is something literally afoot out there in the dark.

The others in the locale are Preston’s nurse and caretaker, the obnoxious and creepy Otis (Christien Tinsley, who also did the effects and make-up for this release, is a master make-up artist on the likes of “American Horror Story,” “Westworld,” and he won an award for Gibson’s The Passion of Christ), and a group of five young women partying in the cabin next door, which is apparently the only two in the vicinity. Soon, one of the women becomes missing, and only Preston has an idea of what’s going on.

As for Biggie, we see him in bits and pieces, such as his glowing eyes, and the inside of his mouth, but we do get the classic monster-in-woods-POV-shots with starburst flare around it, as he watches his potential prey. A group of attractive and nubile women in peril; isn’t that special. Dare I say shower scene? Well, it is way back in the good-old-days of 2006. Make Horror Movies Great Again?

Haley Joel
Okay, okay, I know I’m kinda mocking this as a throwback to the ‘80s, and yeah, in some ways it is, but don’t get me wrong: considering some of the hokey bits, such as the way the creature looks when we finally get to see it in full, it’s still a very effective film and honestly, quite enjoyable.

I read a review recently about the horror genre in general (sorry, but I can’t remember the source…if you know it, tell me and I’ll add it in), and it posited that jump scares are overused and they customarily have sudden loud sounds and spiked, dissonant shrieks in music to enhance the effect. Well, this film definitely relies on that formula, but they manage to use it quite effectively. Also, what Hitchcock liked to do is leave some cinema “space” on one side so you expect the jump to come from there, and then come from the other side. This is another tool that this film uses effectively because it doesn’t overdo it, unlike Carpenter did in the original Halloween, which kinda ruined the fear in the film for me.

A large cast means a numerous kill count, and this one goes hog wild. Not only are there the people in the two houses as potential fodder for the freak, but there is also a string of very impressive cameos (see, told ya I’d get to it) that show up throughout, such as those I mentioned before, Lance Hendricksen, Jeffrey Combs (the Re-Animator, himself!), Paul Gleason (the principal in The Breakfast Club and a high level police officer in Die Hard; he passed away the same year this was originally released), Phil Morris (who was the Martian Manhunter on “Smallville,” and best known as lawyer Jackie Chiles on “Seinfeld”), the underrated and yet arguably the one with the longest film credit list Tiffany Shepis as one of the members of the inevitable slumber party Bigfoot massacre. The entire cast does incredibly well for the budget we’re talking about at the time, considering it was shot on film stock. And may I say, Haley Joel’s sustained lip gloss in both volume and longevity considering the activity is impressive.

Dee Wallace Stone and Rex Linn
Speaking of body counts, the deaths are nice and gruesome with some fine effects. The gore looks great and there’s lots of it, building up to near the end. Despite the addition of some CGI in post-production, most of the SFX by Tinsley are practical and look great.

As with most Blu-rays, as I’ve said numerous times, there is a teeming of extras, so let’s get to the ones I haven’t mentioned yet. Because they had all the original negatives, they were able to put together some nice raw footage for the “Deleted and Extended Scenes” (6:13). Everything that was excised feels right, especially the last one as it gives out too much infomraiton; it’s left in much more subtly, which works better. Then there’s the “Outtakes and Bloopers” (4:09), which is time-coded footage with errors. Some of it is quite amusing and during one scene filmed over and over due to laughing, I kept thinking, “This is film stock and I bet the director is pissed.”

Some of the minor extras are different sound choices, two trailers for this film (and a few for other MVD Rewind releases), a “Poster and Still Gallery” and “Storyboard Gallery.” On a larger scale, there is the original cut of the film, which I saw parts of and there is a definite difference is some aspects and the way scenes are present, but I just skipped and jumped.

Jeffrey Combs
It starts to get more serious with “Back to Genre: Making Abominable” featurette, a 37:15 documentary of the making of the film from story to distribution, broken up into chapters filled with interviews with most of the cast. Now, long making-of documentaries tend of be tedious, but this really was interesting all the way through. It kept a nice pace and also avoided the fluff. Nice!

There are two short films included by the director, one of them being the 8:07 student film, “Shadows.” Shot in black-and-white, which follows a paranoid, wealthy artist who is afraid to leave his house hearing about local murders on the radio (the only voice you hear throughout). He is not nice guy to others, but is that his fear or sense of privilege? The other one is “Basil & Mobius: No Rest for the Wicked” (16:16), which follows two British scallywags as they try to steal some secret plans from a mob boss who runs a gambling house in Jolly Olde (played by Malcolm McDowell). There is gunplay, martial arts, quick repartee dialogue, and even a couple of zombies (one is Kane Hodder). These films are touched with some humor, and quite excellent fun.

Last up is the full length commentary, which I found very impressive. Just so you know, I usually write the main part of the review before watching the extras, so it was nice to hear some confirmation on some of my comments (e.g., the Rear Window connection and the lip gloss). Recorded in June 2006, it features Schifrin, McCoy, Combs and the film's editor Chris Conlee. Now, what I thought was remarkable was that while McCoy was there for most of it, Combs and Conlee’s comments are edited in (sans McCoy) for just the scenes with Combs’ Clerk character. This cut down on the over-talking and made everything clear. What’s more, the content of the conversation was kept to the film, so while there is some humor, it’s pretty straight forward and hardly any filler. A great commentary from beginning to end, and I don’t say that very often.

There is a folded, printed poster that also comes with the Special Edition, which is neat. The only thing missing, that I could think of, was captioning, but I’m not holding that against anyone.

I have to say, for a throwback via homage of some of the great horror films of the 1970s-1990s (though Rear Window was 1954), this is an effective thriller, and a fun time all around on so many different level.



Saturday, February 20, 2016

Review: Stomping Ground

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2016
Images from the Internet

Stomping Ground
Written, produced and directed by Dan Riesser
Anvil Entertainment / Irrational Films
80 minutes, 2014 / 2016
www.stompinggroundfilm.com
www.irrationalfilms.com

Ahhh, the Bigfoot subgenre. I reviewed one for this blog called Fear the Forest (2009) and another called – I kid you not – Sexsquatch (2012) The last one was from Australia called Throwback (2013), and now this one is from the wild and woody area around North Carolina.

John Bobek as Ben
Over a holiday visit down South, we meet our central characters, Ben (John Bobek), a ginger from Chicago who works in Social Media, and his girlfriend, Annie (Tarah DeSpain), a Greensboro local whose reputation whose high school nickname starting with the word “Crazy…” She, of course, being computer-phobic, isn’t even on Facebook (is it any shock she does not have a job in Chi-Town?). Opposites attract, I guess, but should they always?

From the start, Ben comes across at first as a bit of an elitist urban-vs.-rural dick who doesn’t cotton well to all the old boyfriends hitting on his gal, but is not enough of a he-man to fight them off. Actually, I respect him for that last part; similarly, she should be more sensitive to him being a “stranger in a strange land” than feeding into his jealousy. I would say the same thing if it was reversed, if one of his citified friends picked on her in the Windy City for being a Country Girl.

Yeah, from in the onset, the story starts off a bit like Straw Dogs (the real one, 1971; wonder if it’s a coincidence that his name is Ben, the name of Dustin Hoffman’s character in 1967’s The Graduate, who would play the lead in Straw Dogs… yeah, probably a stretch and a case of Cultural Overthinkingitis). Leading the redneck side is Paul (Jeramy Blackford), who from the gecko (yeah, I do know the correct word) you wouldn’t trust with a donut and a pickle.

Tarah DeSpain as Annie
One piece of information we learn right off (and it is in the trailer) is that her boyfriend doesn’t know that she is interested in the Bigfoot, and as a teen she and her friends would camp out searching for it; this includes the comedy relief character, Jed (Justin Giddings, doing an occasional scene-stealing turn), who is just as much into it as Annie. I’m assuming that these “hunting trips” included some large amounts of partying from the looks of things.

Of course, our unbelieving intrepid weenie Yankee is taken on a Bigfoot camping search with Annie, some of her friends (aka the fodder), and the outing’s instigator, Paul, who you just know has some devious plan behind all this, and y’get the feeling Ben is not going to like it. At all. But will he grow a pair like Hoffman in Dogs? I’m not promoting machismo masculinist training, I’m just going with the story, donchaknow?

An interesting aspect of films like this, which is actually closer to fact than is usually acknowledged, is that all the yokels call Ben “City Boy,” but when he uses the term “Redneck” after some of their despicable behavior, he gets called out on it. That’s a very Republican sensibility; if I do it, I’m expressing my freedom. If you do it, you are warring on my freedom.” This is both very blatantly and subtly indicated multiple times. I’m not sure which side the director falls on, but I will posit that he is a Greensboro native (mind you, the one time I was in Greensboro, I met some incredibly wonderful people).

For the first half of the film, during the Dogs part, as I refer to it, I was feeling kind of restless, but not necessarily in a good way. The whole “let’s gang up on the stranger” mentality is one I’ve never been casual with, though I understand it’s point to make it uncomfortable; if it was me in that situation, however, rather than be jealous of something that happened years ago, I would laugh Jeff off, especially his intention to steal his ex-fling, Annie. To his face. I’ve done it and it works as long as it’s in a public shared space and everyone around is informed and understands the context; if it’s approached defensively, the Ben position doesn’t have a chance. Besides, if nerdy Ben is that insecure about his relationship with wild-child Annie, he shouldn’t be in the relationship. I mean, he’s probably going to have to go back South again if the relationship is to continue, as her mother lives there. There’s new thing out called The Holidays during the last two months of the year.

The film's original poser
It’s the second half of the picture where the story and interest really starts to pick up, once you get past the portal of the stereotypical pair of hunt’n’ good-ol-boys, who are the slasher film equivalent of the weirdo loner who warns everyone to stay away! That’s about the time we get to finally reach where we all know the general direction of where the story is going, in the form of the beastie.

Ah, yes, the beastie. I’ve seen some really terrible Sasquatch costumes in my time, because it essentially comes down to a person in a suit, after all. Well, I’m happy to say that this one actually looks really good (you can see a couple of flashes of him – I’m assuming it’s a he considering some of his actions – in the trailer and on the poster). I’m even willing to forgive the sole layer of the creature’s foot/boot which is evident at the one-minute mark of the trailer, though it’s much easier to see in the film itself.  The reason is that everything else about the monster and including the body SFX of the victims, looks pretty nice. Not a huge body count, but an effective one.

Despite the nebbishness of Ben, Bobek fleshes him out a bit, and makes him a character you may not like on some level, but you can put yourself in his shoes and feel sorry for him as a bully target. I don’t know if I felt the compadre level with him as he stands up for himself though I supposedly should, but it does take a lot for him to give any credibility. Even after this, I hope Annie dumps him. The cute DeSpain also does well with Annie as the flip side of Ben’s personality. While he is an off-putting in a know-it-all way, Annie is equally annoying in that she doesn’t really seem to give a shit about him as she flirts back with her exes. Again, DeSpain makes her human and not just a mean girl, though I would also like to add that if Annie doesn’t dump Ben, Ben should also ditch her. They are so not right for each other. It’s Blackford’s Paul who seems the most real, though, and I hated his bully character, which is why I thought Blackford stood out so well. Paul is the only member of the triangle that remains true to himself: a conniving bastard.

Of course, there has to (and should be) a cameo of a genre star from the past who can headline. In this case, it’s Theresa Tilly, who plays Annie’s mom in the first couple of scenes (yeah, she’s in the trailer, too). Tilly is better known among us who grew up on VHS as Shelly, one of the not-so-fortunate cabin dwellers in the 1981 classic Evil Dead. Back then, she went by the nom de acting of Sarah York.

While some of the action is predictable, such as the manning up of Ben, there are some nice and different twists and turns, and a chance for a sequel. I say sit through the first half and think of it as the cranking ride up the coaster, and then enjoy the ride down.

 

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Review: Fear the Forest

Text © Richard Gary / FFanzeen, 2013
Images from the Internet

 


Fear the Forest: Unrated Edition
Written, produced and directed by Mathew Bora
Radiant Pictures
110 minutes, 2009 / 2013
www.radiantpicturesent.com
www.MatthewBora.com
www.centralfilmcompany.com
www.lostempirefilms.com
www.mvdvisual.com

One of the aspects I love about independent horror films, more than any other genre, is when you say “Boy, this is a bad film,” it does not mean avoid it. That being said, boy, this is a bad film.

Shot like a crisp version of VHS-type of video, rather than digitized to look like film, the writing is atrocious, the creature looks like a gorilla suit, and the acting is more wooden than the Pennsylvania/New Jersey border Mountains in which it is filmed. And yet…

Years after a series of killings by a rumored Bigfoot (which we see in the extended prologue), and the aftermath of a bunch of yahoo hunters (going huntin’ rather than hunting, as a comedian once made the distinction) try to earn the $2.5 million (really?) bounty on the creature, a group of five overage college students (I’m guessing) and a dog decide to go to those very woods to camp out. They are led by Matt (director Matthew Bora), who looks about 10 years older than everyone else, to the area via canoe. We know they are being watched by someone or something by the orange-hued POV camera.

Ah, these mid-twenties teens...
Needless to say, they fall prey to the creature – I’m not telling you anything you don’t know already, right? Not that most of them are of any great loss. Most of the three guys are just, well, stooopid. They make the Tony Manero crowd look like they stepped out of "The Big Bang Theory."  They disrespect their girlfriends, act like buffoons among themselves, and make you want the Bigfoot to kill them just to get rid of them. For example, one of the women finds some human bones, and they laugh at her, rather than checking it out themselves. Yeah, I want these clowns to have my back.

And how stupid is this group? No one brings a cellphone. Really? Even in 2009, the thought of someone in their teens or early twenties not having a cell phone seems so unrealistic to the point of unreliability. Another proof of the questionable writing? The number of days in the woods keeps jumping by two. They go up there, and the next sign says “Day 3,” then “Day 5,” followed by “Day 7,” etc.

Anna Kendrick
And when some of the group is on the run, they meet up with a couple of backwoods guys, including one named Bubba.  Near the Catskills? Really? The main character, Barbara (Anna Kendrick), despite being a blackbelt, is manhandled often before semi-fighting back, when she should easily have kicked their machismo-sans-masculinity asses. And Barbara’s father, the New York State governor, takes nine days to send a rescue crew? And what happened to the dog? And then there’s over-the-top Kyle…

What I find amazing is the sheer size of the cast, including extras. There must be dozens of hunters, bit players, families, reporters, radio DJs, government staff, party guests, gratuitous mean girls, and so on. The budget for this film, according to IMDB, is approximately $500,000. I don’t see it. Even with the huge cast, renting a camera, hiring the music and having a British company (!?!) design the creature, I have to wonder where all the money went.

Let’s talk about the gritty now. When it comes to blood and gore, well, there is a little blood, but nothing big, and certainly no body innards. There is one quick topless flash, but that’s it. As for the big, expensive monster costume from overseas, well, I think Matthew got ripped off. There are plenty of effects artists in the States, not to mention in New York alone, that could have done a much better job, even with the animatronic head. Mostly, it looks like a ‘50s creature features man-in-a-suit more than a terrifying beast. So why is it the “unrated” version? Is there a rated version? Must be PG-13, or a very soft R, as it is

There are some cool extras here, the major one being a 50-minute making of documentary that folds in interviews with the director, crew and some of the cast, and how the creature was created from thought to actuality, among many other topics. It remains interesting throughout it’s time. Then there is the deleted scenes, which includes the bloopers, and the trailer, along with a few other bits.

Now, to answer the first paragraph, do I think you should go see it? Hell, yeah. While not so-bad-it’s-good, there is definitely a fun spirit to the film that would make a nice evening with the buds over some popcorn. Just don’t choke while you are amused by it all.

I have not seen any of Matthew Bora’s other work, but I get the feeling that he is possibly “up and coming” as he claims on his bio, and I think with the right people guiding and mentoring him, he might get somewhere.