Review: Night Caller

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2022
Images from the Internet

Night Caller
Directed by Chad Ferrin
Crappy World Films; Girls and Corpses Films; 123 Go Films
84 minutes, 2022
www.123gofilms.com/night-caller

Back in the 1980s, late night was filled with commercials for things like telephone sex-talks and psychics. Personally, I don’t believe in this form of spirituality (I dated the assistant of a professional psychic a few years ago and saw how it worked). That being said, skepticism is not a hindrance to watch films like this one because, hey, is an unstoppable guy in a hockey mask reality?

Susan Priver

Anyway, now that I have gotten that caveat off my chest, let us delve into this film, which focuses in on Clementine Carter (Susan Priver), an attractive woman of a certain age who has a gift (what a certain writer might call a “shining”). She works on the business end of a telephone psychic hotline in a space she shares with fellow phone psychic and boss Jade Mei (international star Bai Ling). Jade also has visions, so in this story, both are legit psychics.

Bai Ling

At the very start of the film, Clementine gets a call from a stranger (the underappreciated Steve Railsback of 1985’s Lifeforce, among so many other classics) and gives her an obvious fake name (yet, Clementine gives clients her real name!), and she sees him murder someone (comedian Kristi McHugh) in her mind, with a big hunting knife. After, he does just that in the real world, in a nice, gory, practical-effects way, including his signature (we son learn) scalping. Shades of Maniac (1981)! This masked killer wears a black stocking over his face, a long blonde wig, and a toque on top (it is filmed in Los Angeles though, not Canada). There is a bit of sexual ambiguity with the killer, who likes to remove certain female body parts, reminiscent of Buffalo Bill in The Silence of the Lambs (1991); there is also a couple of nods to Psycho (1960). And like that film, there is a deep psychological element to both the killer and the psychic that both separates them, and makes them somewhat similar, dealing with the dead and the beyond, whether it is “real” or in the mind.

Clementine’s life is a bit of a struggle. She lives with a movie-loving dad, Charles (Robert Miano, who I’ve recently reviewed in Parasites in 2016, by the same director as this film, which I listed as one of my fave releases of the year) and Get Gone in 2019). His room is full of movie posters and VHS tapes. At one point he’s watching Patrick (1978), which is an Easter Egg as it’s a film about someone who kills, psychically. Her late mother, Emily (Kelli Maroney in cameo form, who was in a number of great ‘80s classics, like 1984’s Night of the Comet and 1988’s Chopping Mall), comes to visit her in dreams as a Cassandra, to warn her of danger. Then there is her racist, Ponzi scheming, violent and alcoholic ex-husband, Doug (Michael Cambridge) who is still pestering her and blaming her for his hitting her (“You should have seen it coming, ‘Madame Psychic’”). Will he redeem himself by the end, or will he be another body for the serial killer? I know which side the majority of the audience is probably on.

Robert Miano

One interesting concept is that, for the purposes of this story, fate can be altered, so if someone has a vision, steps can be taken to change it, which leads to unexpected developments rather than having a vision written in stone (or brain, anyway). Playing with this concept is one of the finer points on the story, and also keeps the suspense going, because even if one of the psychics has a vision, which left alone is what would occur, that does not mean it will happen that way.

The most frustrating thing about this film is that Clem (as her father calls her) has a tendency of making some really stupid decisions, such as going all Karen on the coppers (she even says, “Let me talk to your supervisor,”), giving out too much information or going to dangerous places alone (I get pissed at police procedurals where the cop goes in on their own without back-up, as well; it’s a too common theme). You don’t need to be a psychic to see the problems from a mile away. But it’s not just her: why does the Hotline keep answering the killer’s calls, and if they must, how come they don’t record them for the police? There is definitely, however, a nice interplay of what is “real” and events occurring in the mind of one of the seers.

Kelli Maroney

Another fine point with this film is that it is not filled with starlets running around akimbo, but rather mature actors who are more realistic for the roles (though Priver is only 17 years younger than Miano, who plays her dad). Along with Maroney, there are a few other cameos of note, such as Lew Temple (he’s been in a bunch of Rob Zombie’s films, including The Devil’s Rejects in 2005).

Despite the ages of nearly all the main actors being near or above senior citizen level, the photography makes them look good, even with the over-use of close-ups (for some reason, it seems most of Ling’s shots are a foot from her face; so close, in fact, that when she has scenes with Priver, they practically look like conjoined twins to keep them in the same shot.

As much as I kvetched about some aspects of this story, it still managed to keep the tension and interest high throughout, even as I yelled at the screen, “Why are you doing that!?” There is no nudity, but the gore is quite plentiful, top-notch looking, and all practical, by storied indie make-up artist Joe Castro. It all works together well for the story, so it lives up to its promise.

The film is available on a number of digital and cable platforms, including iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, iNDemand, and DISH.

IMBD Listing HERE 

 

Review: Making Monsters

 Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2021
Images from the Internet

Making Monsters
Directed by Justin Harding and Rob Brunner
Samuel Goldwyn Films; BUCK Productions; Bokeh Collective;
Ginger Cat Studios; Vortex Media
85 minutes, 2019
https://www.facebook.com/makingmonstersfilm

If you want to get me upset, play a prank on me. I am not a fan, to the point where I get anxious around April 1. Heck, I won’t even watch most of them on the Internet. The majority of pranks I find to be cruel, and I have no respect for the fools who do it and them post it online (e.g., a clown chasing people with chainsaws). Note, that if someone does that to me, they are going to get a severe response. But nothing compared to what is happening here: care careful whom you victimize, even in Canada (where this film is shot).

The point of this is that the story centers around a couple: first there’s Christian (Tim Loden) who runs his prank site, and then there is the focus of his vicious pranking, the star of his YouTube channel, his fiancé Allison (Alana Elmer). What she sees in this dick is beyond me. Anyway, enough editorializing. He is a popular content provider who does just that very thing: publish his original tricks online. Merry prankster, indeed, making money off people that he terrorizes. And you just know he’s going to reach an audience that wants to take it a step too far, as is wont in these films.

Tim Loden, Alana Elmer

The problem is, Allison is stressed out and done, and needs some – in the words of that great philosopher Elmer Fudd – “West and Wewaxation at wast.” To achieve this, she asks him to cut it the fuck out, and so they decide to take some time and visit friends out in the country. In genre films, is it ever good to go out to a house – actually, a deconsecrated church – in the middle of nowheresville (a fancier cabin-eth in the woods)? This one is owned by Chris’s long-lost school friend Jesse (King Chiu) and his fiancé, the very odd and off David (Jonathan Craig), who is an uber fan of the prank videos. In the words of that other great thinker, Astro, “Ruh-row.”

Chris is eager explain why he enjoys terrorizing people, and why people lap it up, taking a couple of minutes to explain it, when all he really needed to say is “Schadenfreude.” Meanwhile, I kept wanting to say to Allison, “Really, you want to marry this guy and have his kid? Surely you can do better.”

Jonathan Craig

After a night of waiting for Jesse to show up, this leads to some sex and drugs and well, something unworldly. Up to now, it’s been in our realm, but post-hallucinogenic, the audience is not sure what we are seeing is supernatural or part of a mind-bender, leading to some nice and creepy shit, and some decent jump scares. Is it real, something supernatural, drug-induced, or a prank? After the horrific and short prologue at the beginning that uses a drone quite effectively, and then the second Act ramping up on the creepy-factor, it is hard to say. Of course, most things will be answered in the third Act.

The question is what happens when a prankster meets the dark Web real deal? A taste of his own medicine? You see some of this coming early on in the second Act, but certain elements keep the tensions taut, I am happy to say. This is definitely a watch between the fingers kind of film, and not just because of the violence, but the expectation of it. That’s what makes this enjoyable.

This could have been really corny, but the acting, especially by the two leads, and the way it was shot and stylishly put together by the directors (who have worked extensively in television, such as “Top Chef Canada” and “Canada’s Worst Drivers”), make this a pretty solid scarefest. Also, the church is a great set piece, beautifully designed and laid out. I would love to live there, if it weren’t so secluded.

By the end, the tension really ramps up and becomes quite a frenetic film as our killer, in a mask that I suppose is meant to reflect Chris’s look with long hair and a somewhat beard, makes his way through the small cast with quite gruesome and beautifully done SFX. And the choice of music is worth noting as it both reflects the situation and also juxtaposes it, such as the use of the old folk song (one I have always liked) called “In the Pines” (not listed in the credits, so I don’t know who did this interpretation), mixed with some modern orchestral instrumentals.

As I have indicated earlier, there is a supernatural element to the film in the form of a ghost (Jarrett Siddall), which was fine for some jump scares, but honestly, there really did not need to be anything like that needed, as the spookie really does not advance the story at all (though it looks cool), and the human part of it is certainly terrifying enough.

That being said, this is one of the better slasher films I have seen in a while, being innovative while not going too far off the mark for some effective genre tropes, in fact reminding me of another Canadian release, In the House of Flies (2012).  Yeah, I enjoyed this one a lot.

 

Review: Dark Sister

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2019

Images from the Internet

Dark Sister (aka Sororal)

Directed by Sam Barrett

Nakatomi Pictures / Wild Eye Releasing / MVD Entertainment

96 minutes, 2014 / 2019

www.facebook.com/sororal

www.wildeyereleasing.com

www.mvdb2b.com

As I said recently, sometimes you just want some cheesy flick, but at other times, you may want a more thoughtful piece, like this one.

This particular Australian (Perth, to be precise) release was originally named Sororal, meaning “sisterly”; Dark Sister is a much better and easier to remember title for us in the West who had public education. Wise move.

Amanda Woodhams

We are introduced early on to “troubled artist” Cassie (Amanda Woodhams), who paints wild images from her dreams, which we learn early on are actually visions of real murders, always from the killer’s perspective, even though each vision is a different killer. And yet, of course, they are all somehow connected.

Rather than being kind of a straightforward story, the director, Sam Barrett seems to have taken notes on early David Cronenberg, mixing science, emotion and psychic abilities (where to begin… The Brood and especiallly Scanners is a good start).

He also uses quite a bit of primary colors in his lighting, giving this a Dario Argento-ish giallo feel that makes the high-emotion more palpable. This has been a bit overused lately, but it is actually quite effective here, as are the extreme close-ups.

Most of the film goes at a slower pace with long shots, but occasionally uses Russ Meyers’ style of micro-editing in certain spots to keep up the energy. Barrett focuses some on the mundane, which is a drawback to some of the modern slash-and-burn velocity films that are drawing attention spans to nil, but I feel he uses it wisely as this is not just another slasher film, but more of a surrealistic approach to cinema. This is no surprise to me considering the Australian cinema history (The Last Wave, Picnic at Hanging Rock, etc.… it can’t all be the high-octane level of Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior). There also is a high employment of the fisheye lens.

While Cassie’s visions are violent, and there is a fair amount of blood flowing, there is no gore, which makes it viewable to most audiences except the exceptionally squeamish. There’s more violence and gore on most television crime shows, which has made life a lot easier to watch these kinds of films with the family.

Megan Palinkas

There are a lot of Greek mythology names from The Iliad, such as Hector (fighter), Cassandra (psychic), Diana (goddess of hunting) and Apollo (sun god), which is highly abstractedly to do with the storyline. It’s a cool idea, but you need to watch the whole film to kind of get the connection, though even if you don’t, it can be seen as just a clever device; in other words, if you make the link or not will not affect the story for the viewer.

As for the accents, I have seen other Australian films where I had trouble making out what they were saying, but this is pretty clear; that being said, there is also a caption option on the DVD which I employed, and that helped here and there more for my own hearing issues than accents.

The female characters are way more interesting that the males. Cassie is a strong woman under duress, and her best friend Kelly (Megan Palinkas under a ridiculously large wig reminiscent of somewhere between Dolly Parton and Farrah Fawcett), a flawed human for certain, is compelling. This is also true of Cassie’s monotone-speaking psychologist, Dr. Sosa (Nicola Bartlett). The three male leads, including Kelly’s fiancée Trent (Liam Graham), are kind of whatever (though Jeremy Levi’s Hector does come off the best of them). It’s not the acting, which is fine all the way around, but rather the male characters tend to be boring meat puppets.

Liam Graham

While I don’t remember it being discussed in the film, I want to talk a bit about the fashions and décor (too much HGTV on my family’s part, perhaps). This looks like it was ripped from the late ‘70s disco phase. The clothes are full of tight checkered pants and colorful polyester shirts, and even the furniture is totally retro. There are no cell phones or computers, and even the recording devices are reel-to-reel. Definitely a further homage to the Italian giallo ethic. Either way, it looks way cool.

The extras are the captioning and the trailers, including for this film and a couple of other Wild Eye releases. Then there is the director’s commentary, which I’m actually looking forward to (yes, I tend to write the review proper before the extras, not to be overly influenced). Barrett is joined by Christopher DeGroot, who did the music to the film. Needless to say, there is a strong focus on the soundtrack, but mixed in there are a lot of stories about the making of the film. I was looking more for the meaning behind the story; there is some, which proved to be quite helpful in little touches, but I would have liked more about the overarching plot than the amount we are fed about the music (said the reviewer that used to run a punk 'zine...).

This is a thoughtful piece, both in inception and to mull about afterwards. If that’s your pace, it’s a nice addition. If you want a turbo-fueled slash-a-thon, there’s a new Chucky / IT / Annabelle / etc. movie out.

Review: Thorn

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2017

Images from the Internet

                         

Thorn [aka Legacy of Thorn]

Photographed, written, directed, edited, etc., by MJ Dixon

Mycho Entertainment Group / Wildeye Releasing / MVD Video

97 minutes, 2016 / 2017

www.facebook.com/Thornmovie

www.wildeyereleasing.com

www.mvdvisual.com

Although the more human Leatherface pretty much began the thread of masked killers with sharp objects in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), it was kicked into high gear with the Michael Myers / Halloween (1978) and Jason Voorhees / Friday the 13th (1980) one-two punch of the additional supernatural nature of the hulking killing machines. While not yet cliché, the theme of the Thorn character is also certainly not exactly new. But then again, I truly believe it’s time we had a fresh franchise, doncha think?!

The original character of Thorn was from 2009; he showed up again in Slasher House in 2012. I have yet to see those first two releases, but this comes across as a remake/reboot by its creator. There are a couple of differences I already know about, and it’s probably a good idea to start fresh. Someday, though, I would like to see the original to compare. For example, in the first, Thorn was the concealed character’s family name; now perhaps it refers to the mucho grande machetes he carries.

The story is set in Avondale, a relatively new village in a suburb of industrial England (filmed around Greater Manchester). The film is broke up into two segments, which intercut between each other throughout. One is the modern Leap Year of 2012 (when it was filmed), and the other takes place the previous one, four years earlier in 2008. What is extremely well done is that the present one is chronological, but the previous is shown in reverse order, so it starts with the end of the day, and goes back to the beginning of it. I thought was well written/done is that you don’t lose track of either, and the viewer knows which is which. Bravo.

Thorn is a huge, brute of a man with an arm full of tribal stripe-style tattoos, dressed in tight leather (it must have been hell for Richard Holloran, who portrays him). The mask is interesting with a metallic sheen, and more so the two enormous machetes he carries crossed on his back, though most of the time at least one is in his hand. With superhuman strength (more on that later), he can easily chop a human into bits, though a mid-section stab from front or back seems to be the preferred choice.

The high school into which he enters – nay, saunters, as he has a very confident swagger – to obliterate anyone in his path is full of bullies/mean girls, cheerleaders, nerds and the cool Black guy (Paris Rivers). However, it doesn’t seem to be infested by any supervision. The only adult seen (not counting Thorn, that is) is the janitor, and he’s part of a bigger, cult happening (shades of the Wicker Man, Batman!). Perhaps the teachers and admin are in on it, but it’s never really explained. More on that, later, too.

Jade Wallis

Thorn’s focus is on one of the cheerleaders, Jessica. While he kills anyone who gets in the way of reaching her, he also seems to go out of his way to build a substantial body count. Jess is definitely a flawed human (as are all of us) in a film locus. An odd mix of ego and fear, gets to scream and cower a lot, needing – or demanding – help from others, which doesn’t end well for them. Local actor Jade Wallis does a decent job of it, though occasionally shrilly; but then again, I’m willing to bet someone in that position, being faced with an immortal with superhuman strength and twin machetes, just might be a bit shrill. I’m just sayin’. Jane Haselhurst, who plays her frenemy, Alice, does a nice turn, as well. Actually, the whole cast mostly does a decent job of it.

One factor I enjoyed was watching the difference between the characters in the 2009 sequences compared to the later 2012 ones. Some personalities are completely different, even in body language and tone.  

There are some issues with the film: the biggest one, for example, is that there are some conversational parts that go on way longer than they need be, past their point of usefulness to the plot. This would have been a very tight thrill-ride 80 minutes, but considering the action-to-talking ratio, this is better than most, and its concentrated in just a few scenes here and there.

Also, there are some plot holes, such as the why does this mask have so much power and where does it come from. Why only on Leap Year day. When – and why – did it all start? There are hints that the story will go on (having a title card saying “Thorn will return in” another film is a strong indicator, along with how, to some extent. What is the cult that it seems much of the town’s power class seems to be in on? As with many films of this nature, the first one introduces the evil character, and the sequel(s) tell the backstory in more detail.

There is a lot of blood (much spewing from the mouth) with little gore (juicy bits), and the SFX are largely applications, with some digi stuff thrown in to beef (pun unintended) it up. A couple of nude scenes mostly from the back, ample cleavage and braless tees add to the viewing, but nothing for the women as the men stay clad (and remain mostly clods).

Make sure you stay past the credits for a Marvel-like bit at the end. The extras are a standard-albeit-interesting 22-minute Making Of which includes backstage footage and interviews of the cast shot by the cast, and two different trailers for the film.

With the imperfections in place (hey, I had issues with both the original Halloween and Friday the 13th, too), I have to say this was still a fun film that goes what it sets out to do, create a new and enjoyable killing semi-human killing machine that can become a new – err – legacy to enjoy. I do recommend it.

Review: Invalid

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2016

Images from the Internet

Invalid

Written, directed, edited and scored by Dustin Wayde Mills

Blood Sprayer Productions / Dustin Mills Productions (DMP)

71 minutes, 2015

Truth be told, there are three essential reasons why I was looking forward to seeing this film. First and foremost, it was directed by Dustin Wayde Mills, whose works never fail to please, even when it sometimes gets me squeamish. The second reason is Brandon Salkil (okay, and Dave Parker), who often appear in Mills’ productions; Mills,Salkil and Parker are also besties off-screen). Those are the good reasons. The silly yet still honest one is that I was very curious to know whether the title means (a) someone who is lamed (IN-vah-lid), (b) someone who is cancelled out (in-VAL-lid), or (c) both.

There are two, perhaps three central characters in the film. First off, is the titular, Andrew (Salkil) who, thanks to a previous accident, is in a catatonic state of being a “living vegetable” (a descriptor within the story); Salkil – therefore Andrew – is a tall guy, hunched into his wheelchair. The second and central role is his sister, Agnes (Joni Durian), who takes over as caretaker. While not a beanpole, I wonder how she moves him from the bed to the chair and back by herself, but I digress... The lesser third is the physical therapist, Daryl (Parker), who has a bit of a thing for Agnes. I could also add in Daryl’s friend, Jake, whose sole reason for existence here is essentially to help us understand what Daryl is thinking through verbalization, and also to crack wise as the comic relief. He’s played by the director, Mills.

Through the story we quickly learn that Andrew has a way of communicating with Agnes… or does he? How much of this is really happening and how much is in her head, is one of the mind games the film plays with the audience. Is this a kind of Patrick (1978) vibe, or all PTSD? The publicity for Invalid equates it with Italian giallo horror of Argento and Fulci. Well, I can see it more as the former than the latter, as Argento was as much about the internal as the visual, but Fulci was much more about the graphic. I must say I was impressed by the murders here, especially the first one. Now, I’m certainly not saying it’s anticlimactic because the pace definitely keeps up, but that beginning one is just so well done. It’s not gory, just really effective.

Joni Durian

As Agnes, Durian is an attractive woman playing frumpy. Ever notice how many horror film caretakers are plain and disheveled, even all the way back to Julie Harris’ Eleanor in 1963’s The Haunting? Perhaps to make her look sallow, or to set a mood, Agnes is often dressed in yellow, and shot with lemony lighting. I’m guessing a bit of both (again), because when things get tense, the lighting changes to a red tone. More films are using colored lighting as much as music to set the tone of the scene, which works strongly here.

As far as the frumpy part goes, it’s pretty obvious that beneath the huge red frames, the slicker, and the loose clothes, Agnes is quite a catch, even though in the storyline there is a reason why she dresses down. However, thanks to an early shower scene, we get to know the book under the cover, as it were, In fact, there are a few shower scenes with various characters throughout, and plenty of female flesh (no male nudity, though Mills has proven that’s not something he necessarily shies away from).

Salkil doesn’t really need to do much, other than lay as still as possible, though there is a highly dramatic and creepy physical flashback scene. He has proven that he can be a fine, highly emotive actor in both dramatic and comedic roles. Even when he’s completely limp, there is still a feeling of dread or danger, and I chalk that up to both his skill onscreen, and of Mills’ effective use of moodiness.

From his silly (but highly enjoyable; not meant as anything but complimentary) films early on, Mills has come to master the simple less-is-more style of presentation that I thoroughly enjoy. Usually there are no elaborate sets, and the stories tend to be pretty straightforward, but there is always the twist of the knife (sometimes literally) and plot that just keeps you drawn in.

Yet, despite the simplicity, Mills often uses some quirk that you just don’t expect. For example, during a conversation, the film suddenly turns to a moving manga comic style that works to explain emotions that straight dialog has trouble getting through. This is a really nice and surprising touch.

Andrew demands blood, much like the plant from Little Shop of Horrors (1960 or 1986), to make him big and strong, but only from women. I first questioned the gender demand, i.e., what makes women’s blood different from men’s, but the symbolism of loss of virginity – even from a paid escort – shows a deranged mind through subjective experience. I’m hoping this isn’t too much of a spoiler alert.

The only two negative things I could see are pretty petty and, quite frankly, ridiculous on my part. First, there is a scene with Andrew on a respirator, and it is silent. As having been in a room with someone in that condition more than once, I can tell you, it’s quite noticeable. Even if you have sleep apnea, the CPAP machine, which is a junior version of an inhalation device, is noisy. The second thing is I believe that there is too much information given about motive in the trailer. Don’t get me wrong, I am a coming attractions fan from childhood, but I’m glad I waited until after seeing the film before enjoying the teasers (as I tend to do now with those I review).

So, the question of what the title means, as I mentioned in the first paragraph? Well, I would say (c) as yes, Andrew is an invalid, but through events that occur or have occurred (again, or both), Agnes and Andrew’s lives become cancelled, one by the accident, and the second by giving up her life to care for him, another by other’s actions.

A good story, some great visuals, and a finely honed cast a crew make this another peg in Mills’ directorial cap, one that should be worn proudly.

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/invalid