Hereditary Review

 

        Closing out this month of horror movies, I was dreading this one because the overall mystique of it was interesting to me. Since it received the notoriety of “This generation’s The Exorcist” which I’ll talk about. Ari Aster wrote and directed Hereditary and it’s quite possibly one of the best horror films of the 2010s. Additionally, one of the best films of the decade. It scared me; the whole approach is vastly different from its contemporaries. Which I feel its needed in most horror movies. Boy, did I love it. SPOILERS will appear in the review. 

1. Story

        The film starts with the family going to a funeral for Annie’s mother. Annie played by Toni Collette gives a eulogy where she reminisces on her mother, explaining that she and her had an odd relationship. She goes to a therapy session where she elaborates by saying she would blame her problems on her mother. 

        Her husband Stephen played by Gabriel Byrne gets word from the cemetery that Annie’s mother’s grave was desecrated. Meanwhile, the daughter Charlie acts strange when she sleeps in the treehouse. One odd moment is when she’s at school, a bird hits the window. She goes to the dead bird and cuts its head off with a scissor. 

        Peter played by Alex Wolff is invited to a friend’s party. His mother makes him take Charlie to the get together. Unfortunately, things start to go downhill, not in a bad way. Charlie accidentally eats a cake that has peanuts. Earlier, her Dad makes sure that she isn’t eating a chocolate bar with peanuts. She starts to choke, and Peter takes her to the hospital. 

        This part really freaked me out, Charlie sticks her head out. Peter sees roadkill and swerves, Charlie has her head decapitated. Peter arrives home but doesn’t tell his parents. Annie finds out and she is bawling about losing Charlie. Later in the film, she meets a woman named Joan who tells her about contacting the dead through a séance.

        Annie attempts to do the séance but something more violent arrives and plagues the house. Throughout the film, Annie’s entire family is slowly falling apart due in large part with the grandmother’s connection with the occult.  

2. Mental Illness

        This is the second film that involves mental illness with occult happenings. I will probably say just through some interpretations, most of the happenings can be traced from Annie’s lineage. Since the film is titled Hereditary, the most central motif is mental illness. When Annie is at the group therapy session, she explains that her mother and father had a history with illness. Including her brother who died by hanging himself. 

        With the paranormal events happening around the family. I can contribute it to mental illness. Since the Dad is so dismissive of it and thinks that Annie is not mentally well. For instance, when the journal of Charlie’s is being drawn on. Annie wants Stephen to be the one to burn it since she believes that it’ll cause the activity to stop. 

        I think my favorite moment is when Peter is sleeping and has his head grabbed by a pair of hands. Annie runs into his room and the son accuses her of choking him. She denies it but it can be left up to anyone’s guess whether he was attacked or Annie attacking him. It works since, it’s never entirely clear if the mother or son are imagining it or if it’s really happening. I like that its vague on purpose.

3. Miniatures

        Throughout the film, Annie is working on miniature’s in her workshop. She mostly creates tiny versions of her life such as her mother’s funeral. In the beginning, the movie starts in the workshop and slowly pans and zooms to the house replica. It feels like a Wes Anderson film since when it zooms in, the placement of the room is always centered. 

        In context with the film, she creates the dioramas to escape from her life. She states to her husband that the creations are a “neutral” view of what happened. I feel that it gives her control to the narrative to what happened. Since she created a view of Charlie’s death to mourn her daughter. The whole thing feels weird especially with how Annie inscribed a word in Charlie’s room.

        I think it just highlights just the overall control Annie’s mother has throughout the film. While she doesn’t have a scene dedicated to her, everything just feel that it’s predetermined. Meaning that whatever that is going to happen, will happen. The whole treehouse the family has acts like a miniature since it lights up and most of the weird stuff starts to happen. More so when Annie creates them, it feels like it was supposed to be like that.  

4. This Generation’s “Exorcist”

        I will admit that this movie in comparison with the others that I have seen throughout the month has scared me more. Probably it’s the subject matter such as the paranormal or anything demonic and having no control is what scares me. The real horror I think is just not knowing what’s going on. With the genre, there’s a spectrum where one section is dedicated for the best movies. The middle is good. Lastly, the other side is mostly bad horror movies that are borderline exploitive.

        With Hereditary, it’s in the same league as The Exorcist since it’s very procedural, play it straight type of horror film that doesn’t rely on jump scares. With the films that I watched throughout the month; this method is instantly the go-to. Since, for it to work you need to have your guard down and without any loud noises or a simple bang. The music is what works in tandem with the freakiness. 

5. Toni Collette Should’ve Been Nominated

        It’s an absolute crime and terrible shame that Toni Collette was not nominated in the Academy Awards for her performance. Easily, the main highlight of the film is when she’s giving her monologue to Peter. You can just feel the anger and frustration being directed at him, since he was responsible for Charlie’s death. 

        More so when she starts to feel disconnected with the entire family. For instance, when she has the remaining family start the séance. We believe that in her mindset that it’s the only thing that can make her family feel at peace but her husband is completely dismissive. Her faces that she makes when seeing something horrifying completely has me sold that the actress made a good pick for starring in the film.

 

        So why did she get snubbed? Well just to put it bluntly, it’s a horror movie. You can ask why The Exorcist was nominated back in the 70s, and that was when nothing like that had ever been screened. Additionally, in order to be nominated it has to be voted by the academy voters. From there, it can be assumed that Collette was not nominated. Although, it’s entirely subjective if an actor deserved to be the best in a specific year. That’s a topic for another day. 

 

6. Overall

        Without a doubt, Ari Aster is an up and coming director. He knocked this one out of the park with a very unique and fresh film in the genre of horror. No one could’ve imagine just how effectively scary and creepy Hereditary was when it came out in 2018. I haven’t seen Aster’s second film Midsommar though it’ll probably be unfairly compared with this one. This is the absolute scariest film in the 2010s.

Hereditary gets a five out of five. 

Scream Review

 

I’ve started to think twice about the movies I picked when covering the nineties. Mind you, Jacob’s Ladder is rather good as well as this one. Although, I felt that I should’ve picked other films such as The Blair Witch Project and an assortment of others that are regarded as decent. I think I can attribute it to how the genre in that time was declining in quality. Mind you, there are good ones, but a vast majority were hitting the bargain bins. Wes Craven’s Scream manages to poke fun at itself and be self-aware as far as a horror movie goes. SPOILERS will appear in the review. 

1. Story

        The movie is a mix of a high school movie, a whodunit, and a slasher. In no way does it feel that it feels incoherent or just tone deaf. So it starts with Drew Barrymore’s character getting a phone call. It starts innocently enough as the caller stated it was a wrong number. Then he calls again and starts to antagonize the first victim with what her favorite scary movie is. 

        She answers and the killer who is only known as Ghostface kills her boyfriend and the young girl. Word spreads throughout the high school. Our main character Sidney played by Neve Campbell is shocked by it and her friends joke about who the killer really is. All the friends are typical horror movie tokens. You got the girl who we root for, the ditsy girl Tatum, the boyfriend Billy, the class clown Stu, and the geek Randy. One thing to note is that Matthew Lillard is in the film and it’s just astonishing that he looks like Shaggy in Scooby Doo. Which led him to be cast in the film. 

        Soon, Sidney is being stalked by the killer and starts to become paranoid that her boyfriend is the killer. Meanwhile, the controversial news broadcaster Gale Weathers played by Courtney Cox, pesters Sidney since she believes that Sidney’s mom’s killer is innocent. Ultimately, the principal decides to cancel classes and Stu decides to throw a party to celebrate. 

From there, Sidney soon comes face to face with the killers. That wasn’t a typo, she finds an accomplice, but I won’t reveal who they are. 

2. The Self-Awareness of Being Meta

        Obviously, the main highlight is that film is self-aware for what it is. Technically, it’s not the first film to be a meta horror. Years earlier, Wes Craven made New Nightmare, I can assume that it was the first horror film to be aware of itself. Since it dealt with the idea of making a movie that involved Freddy Krueger. Where they had to make more movies about the character since he’s a demon. 

        Here though, the characters cite that their lives are like a movie. Right down to doing the obligatory love making scene. It doesn’t feel force or any of the characters look at the camera and giving an obvious wink to the audience. The whole thing works since there are many red herrings to figure out who the killer is. We assume its Randy since he’s into movies and Ghostface uses movie trivia to get to the victim’s houses. 

        I think the best example of this is when Sidney turns the tables on the killers. She dials the phone to mess with them mentally. It brilliant because playing in the background is Halloween (1978), where Laurie is fighting back against Michael Myers. In Scream, Sidney is using the very thing to fight back the killers. 

3. Use of Movies

        Like I mentioned earlier, most of the cast talk about movies and poke fun at the idea. In the first act when we see Sidney and Billy, he says that their relationship was like The Exorcist but edited for television. I feel that the use of the movies in general is to make their lives more eventful than what they really are. Since Billy wants to take the relationship to NC-17 levels. You can look that up since I don’t want to elaborate

        I think the times where the characters start to comment on the horror movies is when they are in contact with Ghostface. When he goes after Tatum, she starts teasing him since she wants to be in the sequel. The self-awareness works since they are playing it completely straight. Another example is when Randy starts to explain the rules to survive a horror movie. He states the rules and throughout the final act he manages to survive alongside Sidney. 

        The whole movie motif is interesting since the killings are happening to the small town that the main characters are using movies as a way to have an escaped reality to take their minds off the Ghostface killings. Like when Tatum asks Sidney who would play her when the whole things is turned into a movie. 

4. Legacy

        It was no surprise that Wes Craven had another success under his belt. It really reinvigorated the horror genre due to the change with the status quo. With that, many imitators try to put their spin with the updated teenage angle. The movie I Know What You Did Last Summer tried to replicate what made Scream successful but didn’t get the same results critically. 

        I want to acknowledge that my first exposure to Scream was through the parody movie Scary Movie. It spawned its own series which to be honest, only the first and third ones were decent. They just got stupid for their own good. Since they used Wes Craven’s film as a basis to mock it and to point fun at the other contemporary pop culture happenings that were relevant in the late 90s to 2000. 

        Although, Scream did a better job at poking fun at the tropes and cliches in a horror movie since it was entirely the whole point of the film. More so when films that had either Leatherface, Jason Voorhees and even Michael Myers were not well received and usually resorted to being straight to video or getting thrashed critically with a low box office return. 

5. Overall

        I’m glad that I got to watch this one to close out the 90s outlook on horror movies. Probably next year I can explore other films that were good in their own during the decade since most of the established horror icons’ films were not doing so well. Scream is probably one of the most interesting and game changing horror film due in large part that it acknowledged what it was since it didn’t beat the audience over the head. 

    Scream gets a four out of five. 

Jacob's Ladder (1990) Review

 

       We have now reached the 1990s, the decade where the horror genre has changed. With hits such as Scream and The Blair Witch Project the 90s were full of gamechangers. For today, I will be reviewing the psychological horror movie that should at least get some love, Jacob’s Ladder. Directed by Adrian Lyne, I picked this movie because I wanted to look at the psychological horror angle and this one happened to pop up on my radar and fit with the 90s movies that I wanted to see. SPOILERS will appear in the review. 

1. Story

        It takes place during and after the Vietnam Conflict. Jake Singer played by Tim Robbins is part of a platoon in Vietnam. The group is ambushed, and Jake manages to escape. As he hides in the jungle, he is stabbed by a bayonet. He awakes back in the United States in a subway in New York City. 

        From what we can gather, Jake has been seeing hallucinations and attempts to perceive what is real and not. He visits his chiropractor who helps him with his back problems. The real horror aspect appears when he and his wife Jezz played by Elizabeth Pena go to a dance party. Jake hangs around and a palm reader asks if he wants his to be read. 

        The palm reader says that Jake is dead. He laughs it off and from there, he sees one of his hallucinations. His wife is dancing with someone and he morphs into a reptilian creature. Jake awakens in another life with his first wife. The whole story switches back and forth from Jake in Vietnam, to his first wife and, his second wife. All the while attempting to figure out what’s wrong with him and questioning if he’s dead. 

2. Idea of Death

        Throughout the film, Jake has been struggling if he’s dying or if he really is dead. He talks with his chiropractor explains a concept that is really thought provoking. He cites the theologian Meister Eckhart. From what Jake’s helper explains it is that someone who burns in hell is someone who can’t move on. On the flip side, when someone is content with themselves the demons become angels which free the person from Earth. 

        The whole notion that Jake is stuck in limbo and attempting to stay alive is the most interesting aspect in a horror movie. The whole world in the film that is the main setting can be interpreted as either limbo or Hell or a combination of both. Since him and his surviving group see the demons that stalk them throughout New York City. My favorite moment is when Jake is taken to a hospital, they move him to another wing which is dilapidated and surrounded by mentally unhealthy patients. 

        In between all of that, he switches between his previous lives before and after the conflict. It’s like he’s trying to relive the lives but can’t appear to move on since he had a son played by Macauley Culkin. His son Gabe died being ran over by a car. It can be interpreted that his deceased son and the chiropractor are spirit guides. Since the chiropractor gave Jake the speech he gives Jake a chance to move on.

3. MK Ultra

        The only part where the film tries to justify the weirdness of everything and attempt to rationalize what’s been happening with Jake and his group, a chemist named Michael explains to Jake what’s happening to him. Before I explain, let me talk about MK Ultra. During the Cold War, the CIA experimented on various civilians on the use of LSD and mind control. Now, that bit is the basis on what’s happening to Jake. 

        Michael explains to Jake that he was contacted by the Army to create that increases the aggressiveness on soldiers to perform better in the battlefield. He dubbed the drug the Ladder and it worked. Although, the patients killed each other. Jake’s group was prescribed the drug which triggered the attack on his platoon. Ultimately, a fellow soldier killed Jake.

        I feel that this was the weakest part of the film. I would’ve liked it if it was just on Jake and his group attempting to either survive in the Hell/Limbo combo or attempting to move on. It feels tacked on since there had to be a bit of irony with what’s going on with Jake. 

4. Legacy

        As I was researching the film, I was not aware that it was the inspiration of the video game series Silent Hill. I haven’t played the series since I’m not brave but being aware of it and seeing the gameplay, I can see where the inspiration is coming from. I feel that, the psychological horror sub-genre is untapped in way of storytelling. One example being used in television in the show from FX Legion but it’s predominantly a comic book show with psychological stuff sprinkled in. 

Unfortunately, Jacob’s Ladder was remade in 2019. I won’t bother watching it and by judging from the trailer and what other critics though of it. Yeah, it can belong in the infamous group of bad remakes. 

5. Overall

        After watching so much horror throughout the 60s to the 90s so far, Jacob’s Ladder is more subdued in comparison to its horror brethren. There are moments where it’s startling and the imagery and what Jacob goes through is terrifying and creepy, this is probably the safest horror film that I’ve seen so far. It’s developed a cult following and just by writing my own personal review on it, I may expose it to some people to at least give it the attention it deserves. 

        Jacob’s Ladder gets a four out of five. 

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) Review

 

I feel like this is the best the 1980s has to offer in terms of horror. Wes Craven has made himself the premier horror director with such hits as The Hills Have Eyes, The Last House on the Left and, Scream. Hell, he’s been dubbed the “Master of Horror.” With A Nightmare on Elm Street, it’s been considered one of his best and I declare it to be one of the best horror films in the 80s. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

For being an original movie, its premise is entirely unique. A young girl named Tina is chased by a hat wearing figure. She wakes up from the dream and tells her friends about it. Nancy played by Heather Langenkamp believes her and tells her that she’s been dreaming of the same person as well. Her boyfriend doesn’t played by Johnny Depp.

When Tina’s boyfriend Rod interrupts the get together in her house, is when we see just how terrifying Freddy is. Nancy thinks that Rod didn’t do it but, is promptly arrested by the police and her sheriff father played by John Saxon. Throughout the film, Nancy attempts to figure out who the killer is in the dreams and how to stop it.

The overall dream angle that the film went with is highly original. From what I could gather, Wes Craven read about a story that was covered in the LA Times. It said that a group of men that were refugees fleeing the South Asian countries like Vietnam were dying in the middle of the night. The only knock on those stories was they were never followed up. The new approach gave the slasher genre new synergy in terms of showing a new terrifying villain.

2.      Nancy

Nancy is the one that most people relate to. She reminds me of Laurie Strode in Halloween (1978), just being the opposite of her friends. The overall vibe is that she doesn’t blow off what Tina experiences in her dreams. The moments where she is dreaming, and Freddy appears is just borderline creepy and weird.

The one shot that is my favorite is when she’s asleep, Freddy appears to warp reality and reach out of the wall to stare at Nancy. I love that shot and effect, since it’s just a wall of spandex fabric. It just shows just how far we’ve come in special effects, now everything has to be done in a computer.

When she is ultimately confronted by Freddy, she gets afraid but is ultimately prompted by the deaths of Tina and Rod to fight back. I love that she goes above and beyond to get a book about survival and setting up booby traps to stop the killer. It’s a first time I have seen that which, again reminds me of Laurie Strode when she fights back against Michael Myers.

3.      Freddy

If you had to make a choice between picking either Freddy Krueger or Jason Voorhees as the most intimidating killers in cinema. I would certainly pick Freddy. Played by Robert Englund he is the most intimidating villain and just the fact that you only see him in a dream or in this case nightmare makes him someone you really don’t want to see.

The whole background of him is just kept to a very minimum. When Nancy reveals to her mom the hat that she taken from Freddy during her dream, the mom completely tries to forget about the man. Ultimately, Nancy and us the audience are told about the background of Krueger. He was a child killer and the parents decided to burn down a building where he was as payback. From what can be inferred, Freddy is now back to get revenge.

The only time where we see a flashback of him is in the very beginning. We see that Freddy is assembling the iconic knife glove. It just works when we only need just a small bit of info of who exactly the killer is and to not have it elaborately drawn out. The sequels did that but I’ll talk about that in a little bit.

4.      Theme or What its Really About?

So what makes this one of the best Freddy Krueger film, since there only is three good ones but, this one takes the cake. Really, it’s just the themes that the film has that makes it really about something. What I mean by that is there are some movies where you follow the plot and that’s really it. Some films including this one has things where the theme is the central point of the film. By and large it is a slasher film, although it’s more than that.

It’s about the sins of the father. Meaning that when the character’s parents killed Krueger, the kids are unfairly punished. The actions of what the parents did caused Nancy’s friends and boyfriend to be killed since the killings are interpreted as payback. Another example is just growing up as a teenager with sex being the main thing. Though, when Freddy appears it happens when something sexual happens. It’s small but it’s something that I found out.

5.      Legacy or how to turn an intimidating icon to comic relief

Originally, the film was supposed to be a happy ending where Nancy and her friends drive off. The studio execs at New Line Cinema had other ideas by stating that they want a twist ending. Which had Nancy riding with her friends, but the car has control of itself and her mom being grabbed by Freddy. What followed was a nine-movie franchise which included a reboot. As well as a tv show with Freddy as a host.

They made Freddy from an intimidating villain to comic relief. Freddy would sometimes crack jokes or find hilarious ways to kill the teenagers in the dreams in the succeeding sequels. Wes Craven decided to make one more Freddy movie with New Nightmare. I will review that next year, but I believe that it was the first film to be a meta horror film. Meaning it’s self-aware.

Of course, Freddy ultimately fought Jason in their movie Freddy vs. Jason, it was cooky and silly which I think was the point and is a product of the early 2000s. For some reason, the character had to be rebooted in 2010. It’s a remake but wasn’t that good critically. I think that properties from the past should just be put to rest since if there’s an updated take, it would prompt curious viewers to find the superior take on the character.  

6.      Overall

A Nightmare on Elm Street is easily one of the best horror movies to come out when it did.  It saved New Line Cinema from going under financially and is universally regarded as Wes Craven’s best film. I think its simple approach and the killer is what makes the film beloved to anyone who wants to take a look at it. They’ll probably get bogged down by the quality in the sequels but can at least appreciate this one. 

A Nightmare on Elm Street gets a four out of five.

The Thing (1982) Review

 

     

          The 1980s was the peak and the start of the decline of the horror genre. Two pop culture icons appeared and changed the horror genre. Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger are horror icons that changed the game. Although, there were small gems that fell through the cracks. John Carpenter's The Thing came and was misunderstood. It didn't do well financially and was eviscerated by critics. Years later, it went through a reappraisal process and became a beloved remake. I feel that Carpenter teased this movie when viewing Halloween (1978). When Laurie is with the kid she is babysitting, they see the original The Thing From Another World. Lastly, it's based on a novella called Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell Jr. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

Since it’s a remake of the original it takes its own liberties and follows somewhat from the novella. A spaceship lands in the Antarctic. We then follow a helicopter controlled by the Norwegians trying to kill a runaway husky. The noise wakeups the crew in a United States Outpost. They investigate and confront the Norwegian pilot tell them something which they can’t understand. The crew shoot at the pilot and take in the dog.

Macready played by Kurt Russell takes a few of the crew to investigate the Norwegian outpost. When Macready’s company arrive, they find that the outpost has been burned. They gather as much info as they can to see what led to the hunt of the husky. Meanwhile, one of the workers Clark leads the dog to the pack. It then starts to expose itself which triggers the huskies to bark and yelp.

Soon, the workers realize that the dog is an alien. Since there is no help arriving in their area, paranoia begins to consume the group when they figure out that the alien can imitate them. Macready and the others try to find who is the real alien while also attempting to not go insane. I feel that the story comes across as a Lovecraftian story. Meaning that the creature is the whole center of the story. Those types of stories called “Weird Fiction” don’t really work for me since there aren’t any depth in character.

2.      The Thing

Obviously, the main star isn’t Kurt Russell. He takes a backseat to the main star of the movie. The special effects of The Thing is so, I can’t think of a right word to describe it. Realistic and grotesque, those are the two words that I can at least come up. I find it interesting that the man who is responsible for the special effects Rob Bottin got in the opening title sequence along with the main actors and director.

Clearly, he unleashed so much into the film. I think the best showcase out of any of the moments where we see the creature is when the alien is with the huskies. When the alien peels off the husky skin to show its form is truly engrossing and horrifying. You really feel bad about the dogs since they are scared. Like I mentioned before, one tries to escape by biting against the fencing but inevitably gets absorbed.

I find that the whole concept of The Thing is just not limited to its body that it creates. It’s an adapting organism. There is a shot where the crew is testing their blood and one sees that the blood from the Norwegians is moving and begins to go after the member. I think it’s original and quite possibly one of the scariest aliens ever created. It should be up there with the Xenomorph and Predator. 

3.      Paranoia

When it came out, it was torn asunder by critics which they say that it was very bleak and nihilistic. I feel that the overall vibe is warranted in the film. The film takes place in the Antarctic with no help. With the entire crew knowing that any of them can be the alien increases the paranoia.

I think it was intentional since the only likeable character is Kurt Russell’s. Everyone has their own personality, but we never really get to know them. When the alien starts to cause problems, I feel that any sympathy for the other characters are gone since, we don’t even know if any of them are the alien. More so when they start to turn on each other.

It works as a work of weird fiction or a Lovecraftian film. Since the whole experience is just how they slowly start to be combative and figure which one isn’t who they are. This is probably the first time where a horror movie has that motif. Since mostly any horror has a killer or people trying to survive. I say, the film is unique by introducing this paranoia angle since this alien can adapt. 

4.      Overall

This is probably the shortest review I can muster for The Thing. Mind you, it’s good, but nowhere near as good as Halloween (1978). If the cast was memorable and amped up the dread of the alien it may have been the best. This is by far one of the best remakes since it’s hard for a movie to differentiate itself from an older adaptation. For one thing, the movie must be different and try something new. The special effects are the main highlight and should be appreciated since computer generated images would make the concept feel tacky. Which what happened when the story was adapted again but acts as a prequel to this movie.

The Thing (1982) gets a four out of five.

The Exorcist Review

 

            I’ve been waiting for the right time to watch this one. Be it that it is October, I decided it was time to watch this classic. Doing some background, it has the notoriety of being “The Scariest Movie Ever”. I’ll talk about that but just to state it bluntly, it’s probably one of my favorite films I have seen. Something about great films being adapted from books always makes it seem that it depends on the substance of the book to make the film grand. Just this once I won’t be talking about the story but ostensibly talk about the best things that I can think of in the film. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

2.      The Iraq Scene

            This is probably one of the best first halves in the movie that I have seen in any film that I watched. With any newcomer that is watching for the first time and being confused why it takes place in Iraq, all I can say that it’s called “Set-Up”. Father Merrin played by Max von Sydow is part of an excavation, a boy tells him that his group dug up something. Merrin goes to the specific location and finds some odd relics. What he digs out further is a head of the demon named Pazuzu. Now, it’s name is never uttered in the movie and it’s the wisest move since it’s a silly sounding name. The sequel did it and the less I say about that one, the better.

            Near the end as he leaves the country, he visits an old temple. He looks around and a shadow appears and it’s a statue of the demon. I love the succeeding shots, such as the dogs fighting and a wild west looking shot of the Father looking at the statue. It communicates to us with no dialogue that Merrin has faced the demon. And the obvious that the devil makes men turn against each other.

            I love this act due to the overall foreboding vibe. With the Muslim prayer chants telling us that evil is universal, and it’s not just limited to Christianity or Catholicism. It’s everywhere. One thing that I had to look up was the actor’s age.  Max Von Sydow was in his forties when The Exorcist was being filmed. They put layers of makeup to make him look really aged. He looks like himself years later when he appeared in Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

3.      Father Karras

            One would think that the film would be focusing on the young girl Reagan played by Linda Blair. But her situation is just the framing story. The real main character is Father Damien Karras played by Jason Miller. He’s the most conflicted person of faith I have seen. He has trouble with himself losing his faith and asks his superior to transfer. Compounding this he is briefly living with his mother who he wants to relocate to somewhere better.

            He isn’t the typical good priest. He smokes, drinks and really doubts Reagan’s mom Chris when she asks if he can do an exorcism. Karras explains to her that there haven’t been any events since the idea of mental health has been what he believes what causes the exorcisms that happened in the past.

            His character is so dynamic that when talking about this concept in literary terms called the hero’s journey, Karras fits the bill. Meaning that his character is in a bad position. He gets a call to help but he rejects it. Eventually he relents and joins his associate Father Merrin to rescue Reagan from the demon. Unfortunately, he dies and I honestly didn’t want that to happen to him. But I can understand that it fit his overall redemption that the film was aiming for.

4.      The Demon

            As I mentioned earlier, the demon has a name but the movie doesn’t announce it. Additionally, it’s established that Merrin has squared off against the demon in his younger years. It was voiced by actress Mercedes McCambridge. For as much as it is just a voice, her performance gives the demon credence to being a legitimate threat. I’m glad that there wasn’t any shot or just dialogue to explain how it made it to Georgetown but that it appeared in the house. Well, we do hear that Reagan has been playing with a Ouija board and made an imaginary friend.

            It proves to be a worthy antagonist to Karras. When Miller’s character first meets Reagan, he thinks that it’s just the girl acting up. The demon says that it is the devil. Karras goads into making the straps that is clamping on Reagan’s wrists to go away. It says that’s no fun and pukes on Karras.

            I think the best moment is when Karras goes back into Reagan’s room he sees Merrin dead and seeing his mother in the bed. The demon giggles which prompts Karras to punch the demon and make it possess him. I think one of the ways the demon does to make it seem scary is to make illusions. With illusions the demon twists Reagan’s head to face the other side and to voice Damien’s mom.

5.      The Subjectivity of Being Scared

Now, with it bearing the notoriety and title of “Scariest Movie Ever Made”, I believe that the real terror isn’t so much of the exorcism. It’s not knowing what was wrong with Reagan before her mother called Damien for help. Chris takes Reagan to the hospital and the one moment where she’s in the examination room shows just how much it looks like a procedural. With Reagan having her blood drawn and to have scans of her brain being taken which causes her pain.

            It’s one thing to be immediately scared with not knowing what’s wrong with your child and with yourself. And I feel that the scenes with Chris experiencing the demon’s illusions and power are indeed frightening. But I feel that the real horror comes with not originally knowing and telling the professionals what happened. Only to be blown off and say that it’s a mental psychosis.

            When it came out, a load of people were actually genuinely frightened of the movie. Some had to be escorted out of the theater and some puked. I think it was a case of just not being prepared or exposed to what was going on that had people off their rocker. More so with the hype that may have got the movie to get the title that it got at the time.

            Does it still apply now? I don’t think so. I do think that there are other movies that are frightening but are just tame in horror movie standard. Even a movie that has war in it can have horror elements and make it scary. I think as a genre, one has to look at the whole slate and pick which ones that generally did scare them and the others that made them startled or made them anxious.

6.      Overall

When it came out in 1974, no one would think it would be nominated with so many awards including Best Picture. It’s a massive feat to have a horror movie be nominated and be in the same category as one of the best films to come out. I think when more films come out that deal with exorcisms that aren’t as successful as The Exorcist. It can at least be attributed with one glaring thing. It’s not so much of the event, but more on the human drama investment with the characters that make the event gripping. We go in expecting an exorcism, but the real crux is the person doing it as a way to find his faith and be redeemed.

 

The Exorcist gets a five out of five. 

Halloween (1978) Review

It’s the 1970s now, cinema has changed drastically. When the medium had started to die down from popularity, studios started to lose money. Many businesses with no movie making background started to buy movie studios. To regenerate profit, studios started to hire young ambitious filmmakers to bring in more money. So what does Halloween from 1978 have to do with that?

I can say that it’s probably one of the best independent slasher films I have seen from the 70s. It was made with 300,000 dollars and grossed 40 million dollars. Directed by John Carpenter, who I will talk about his other film next week, introduces the moviegoing audience to Michael Myers. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

So the film starts in the fictional Haddonfield, Illinois in 1963. We see a one take point of view shot of someone killing a girl. We later learned that the killer is a kid. Michael appears with his parents that aren’t shocked, they’re like “Oh boy, again with this?” 15 years later, his psychiatrist Dr. Loomis played by Donald Pleasance arrives with the sanitarium’s nurse and notices the asylum’s inmates are wandering by the gate. The nurse is attacked by one of the patients and gets out of the car. Michael takes it to go back to Haddonfield.

Most of the film takes place on, well, Halloween. We follow the main character Laurie Strode being herself and hanging with her friends. Later in the night, she babysits as well as her friends but, I shouldn’t really explain since you know what’s going to happen. In between that, Dr. Loomis goes to Haddonfield to find and stop Michael.

2.      Michael Myers

This is probably one of the most intimidating villains and killers in film. It’s unique to have the film start in his point of view. More so with Dr. Loomis explaining to the local sheriff what Michael’s life was when he was in the sanitarium. The idea of someone being “Pure Evil” sounds about right to describe him, since he just kills with no remorse.

He doesn’t even speak any lines, he just breathes really deeply. I think the best scene or shot that really capture the essence of Myers is when he kills Paul the boyfriend. Michael kills him and has his body raised so high that Paul’s feet doesn’t touch the floor. Michael just takes a step back and tilts his head left and right to really admire his work. With no lines and just having it played completely straight, this is the most terrifying killer I have seen.

One tidbit that isn’t talked about is his mask. Few people know that his mask is the face of William Shatner from the classic Star Trek television show. It’s painted white and I always wanted to know if John Carpenter had other ideas for the mask or just picked it since it’s something that’s different.

3.      Laurie Strode

Played by Jamie Lee Curtis, she is the best normal character in the movie. She’s down to earth in comparison with her ditsy friends. Like Laurie is the opposite and gets teased by her friends when she spots Michael. She’s a good example of the final girl trope that appears in horror or slasher films. 

A trope is something that happens in a film. For instance, in a superhero film, the main superhero has a final battle with the villain. Its what’s expected with a movie since by nature they must follow the genre formula. Which leads to why this movie is so good.

One more thing is that she goes through a character arc. Meaning she changes when we see her in the beginning through the end. She thinks she’s seeing a figure but it turns out it is Michael Myers. She ultimately tries to escape but manages to stab and stop him from killing her.

4.      What Made it Good

If you have a movie with totally unlikeable characters getting killed, one would be glad that they’re dead and not really caring about the characters or be invested in the movie. A good film like Halloween has a good protagonist where you care. The moment when Laurie is in danger made me scared since I didn’t want her to die from Michael. The moment where she hides in the closet and Myers smashing the openers prompts her to stop him. She uses wire hangars to stab him which makes her character so much more likable. It makes her brave and not afraid of Myers.

Also, the overall myth of Michael is just short and to the point. We don’t have Michael explain his motive and what I said earlier, Loomis sums up Myer’s whole problem. If we had to delve even more deeper it would’ve just ruined just how Michael is just an enigma.

5.      Legacy or the sequels, reboots and, retcons

Just to get this out of the way, John Carpenter originally wanted the series to be an anthology series. After the first sequel, the third one didn’t have Michael, instead a corporate Halloween company kills kids with their costumes. While it’s one movie that I might look at next year, people hated it since it didn’t have Michael Myers.

Throughout the late eighties and the nineties, the Halloween franchise went back to Michael to be the main killer. The sequels tied Michael to a cult but it didn’t go anywhere and bombed. The first instance of the retcon is in Halloween H20: 20 Years Later, where the film acts like a follow up with the first two movies. It ended with Halloween Resurrection, the only thing I got to say is Busta Rhymes, really? The series was remade by movie director and musician Rob Zombie, the first one was just okay. He instilled a grindhouse, white trash version of Michael Myers. The sequel just sucked.

In 2018, another Halloween film just titled Halloween (2018) is the second retcon, but this time acts as a sequel to the first Halloween. It was pretty enjoyable and it kicked off a new series that is supposed to continue next year and end in the following.

6.      Overall

This is one of the most enjoyable and fun horror movies that I have seen. It’s packed with so much suspense and the music really amps up the anxiety levels. John Carpenter really outdid himself and some consider this movie to be his best. I feel that everyone should watch it on October 31^st, as a traditional movie.

Halloween (1978) gets a five out of five. 

Rosemary's Baby Review

      As the week of spotlighting two 1960s horror movies wraps up, I picked Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby to close out the week and transition into the 1970s. I say that because the film deals with the idea of the supernatural in terms of belief. Based on a novel by Ira Levin and Polanski doing the extra effort of writing and directing the film, some consider his adaptation one of the best to translate the book to film. This is the first movie I have seen of Roman Polanski. Just to get it out of the way, I won’t be talking about his personal life since we’ll be judging his work as such. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

The film is about a young couple moving into a new apartment in New York City. Rosemary and Guy Woodhouse played by Mia Farrow and John Cassavetes respectively find the right apartment and adjust. While touring, Rosemary finds a letter from the prior tenant but blows it off. As they adjust, old neighbors come to introduce themselves, I’ll talk about them after this.

Guy is an aspiring actor and somehow got a prestigious part for a play after the first actor went blind. They celebrate with the Castavets and the couple decide to make a baby. Rosemary has a surreal dream and notices that the dream is a nightmare. She wakes up and sees scratches from Guy but ignore it.

The entire film focuses on Rosemary slowly becoming paranoid about her pregnancy. Since she believes that people are trying to kill or harm the baby. I’ll sprinkle in more on the third half in the movie since I feel that it really is the best moments that has the dread.

2.      The Castavets

The Castavets are quite possibly one of the most unassuming but nosey neighbors I have seen in any film. When the Woodhouse’s move in, Mrs. Castavet snoops around the house and noticing that their furniture is expensive. It gets to a point that Rosemary becomes annoyed by them since they keep coming in. When Rosemary get’s pregnant, they give her herbal drinks and feed her desserts which dramatically change her.

I feel that somehow this decade had it where the villains where the unassuming and perfectly normal people. Albeit, the small detail was that something was off about them. Using Norman Bates from Psycho, he came off as socially maladjusted with an odd habit and a mental deterioration. Here though, they come off as very inquisitive and manipulative to the new couple. We’re never shown the scene where Guy made the deal with the devil with the old couple, but it becomes apparent just how much it inadvertently affects Rosemary.

3.      The Degeneration of Rosemary

Throughout the whole movie, Rosemary goes through a transformation when she is pregnant. She starts of with having a pig tail haircut to having a new hairstyle called “Vidal Sassoon”, which her husband and friend Hutch find odd. I feel that it contributes with the subtle manipulation by the Castavets. For instance, there’s a shot where Rosemary is walking in their apartment and as she’s walking, the light bearing down on her face makes her look like a skeleton.

Another instance of where Rosemary is slowly getting paranoid is her having no trust with anyone looking after her. She starts taking herbal drinks from the Castavets which cause her pain in the stomach. More so when her obstetrician Dr. Sapirstein tells her to not read or take pills. It makes her aware that he is in cahoots with the Castavets. I feel that the main horror is the lack of control one has. Especially if a woman being pregnant, where the baby is priority number one. Although, near the end is how I feel is the real horror.  

4.      What We Don’t See

I think the main highlight in the movie is Rosemary seeing the Satanic coven with the baby. Rosemary carries a knife intending to kill them all. Only to be told to look at her baby. She looks at the crib, but we never cut to one shot or a brief look at the baby. We only see her face turned to shocked with horror. It works so well in its execution.

If we even had a look at what the baby was, I think it would have derailed the whole movie. Since either the baby is a perfectly normal or a demonic Cthulu looking one, we are never shown how he looks, and I feel it’s the most underutilized method to making a horror movie. It works because we’re fixed on Rosemary’s horrific expression and everybody else’s satisfaction with how the baby turned out.

The real creepiness is her rocking the baby gently. Since, its her own motherly nature to look after her baby. Knowing that he is the son of the devil. I haven’t read the book and I can only imagine how the author wrote that scene when it happened.

5.      Overall

This is one of the best Polanski film he has made. Additionally, one of the best horror movies from the 60s. While it’s never had moments where there’s an impending doom or anything as such. It has the unnerving dread that something is very wrong and lack of control to really drive the point to feel nervous and sorry for Rosemary. It’s one of the best horror movies to come out of that time and I feel it still holds up now.

Rosemary’s Baby gets a four out of five. 

Psycho (1960) Review

    This week we begin to look at the 1960s in horror. Two movies changed the genre, none so more than Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. It could be considered one of the first slasher films since many believed that Halloween and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre were the first examples of the sub-genre. What many people don’t know is that the film is based on a novel by Robert Bloch. Psycho is considered one of Hitchcock’s best since, to be frank, most of his films are considered great.

    One more thing to keep in mind is that Hitchcock made the film due to him being frustrated with the drama of making his other higher budgeted films. While they weren’t bad, hell they’re considered masterpieces. He decided to make it low budgeted, which explains the black and white. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

Since I haven’t had the chance to read the novel, I’ll be just taking the assumption that the movie takes some liberties in its plot. Regardless, it starts with the main character Marion Crane played by Janet Leigh. She is seeing her lover Sam and wants to marry him. What stops them is the debts that Sam inherited from his Dad and previous marriage. Marion works at the real estate office and is being flirted by a client. Who for some reason carries 40,000 dollars to purchase a house. She is instructed by her boss to put it in the bank to keep it safe.

Marion lies about having a headache and takes the money with her. As she is driving, she sees her boss who looks back at her. Marion begins to worry that her boss suspects she stole the money. She thinks the words that her boss will says and continues to drive. She pulls over the road to sleep. She is woken up by a highway patrolman who suspects something is off about her. Marion leaves and enters a dealership to trade in her car. The cop follows her. As she leaves, she once again thinks what the salesman and cop are saying about her.

She pulls over to a motel by the highway called Bates Motel. She honks at the house overlooking the hotel for help and a man named Norman helps her. He picks her room to stay and invites her to have some dinner. She finds out who Norman is and he reveals that he lives with his mother. After the conversation ended, Marion goes to her room. Norman looks at her through a peep hole. As the woman is showering, someone murders her.

This is the first time that a main character is killed off in any movie. One would think that the movie would be over since, the character that we were following is now dead. The second half is focused on investigating who killed Marion.

2.      Norman Bates

Norman is one of the most interesting and scariest characters in 20^th Century film. One would have a preconceived notion that someone being scary would look repulsive or demented. Here, he looks normal. Played by Anthony Perkins, he manages to be unassuming and soft spoken. There’s one shot when he is talking to Marion, just above him is a taxidermized owl leering. I feel that it’s a very subtle way to show that he is a predator, but just his personality is enough to convince us that he’s innocent.

He isn’t. During the second half of the film, he is being investigated and he lies about the whereabouts of Marion. I’ll elaborate more on what happens to him since I really don’t want to pack in the twist he is connected to. What I will say is that he was involved in the sequels but, I feel that the nuance that Anthony Perkins had in the first one is sort of gone since everybody knows who he really is. I haven’t seen the sequels but just the fact that the first one is universally beloved, makes all the sequels inferior.

3.      The Toilet

This seems as a stretch to talk about this. You could think and ask, “Why am I talking about a toilet?” Well, for some trivia about film history you never thought you would know, this film is the first film to have a shot of a toilet. As well as it flushing. Yes, you read that right. Back then before 1968, there was a censorship board mostly known as the Hays Code. It was a very overt censorship board that did not want anything sexual or deviant to be portrayed on screen. Not even have a toilet being flushed or shown flushing since it was considered a big no-no.

I thought it should be warranted a topic of discussion since, Marion used the toilet to get rid of the total amount of money she spent. Attempting to erase her crime she just committed.

4.      The Last Act

Now, this is probably one of the best third acts in film. As you probably seen from the poster above the blog, Hitchcock made it explicitly clear that no theater will allow anyone to go in to watch the movie if they arrive late. Some may call it petty, but some audience members would be completely lost at what exactly is happening. What happens is that Sam and Marion’s sister Lila meet a private investigator who has been assigned to find Marion.

The P.I’s name is Arbogast and he is promptly killed by the same killer in the Bates house above the motel. So Sam and Lila go to the motel to figure out who killed Marion. Sam distracts Norman as Lila goes into the Bates’ house. Norman knocks out Sam and tries to find Lila. She is in the basement and sees Norman’s mom. She realizes that the Mom is dead and behind her is Norman dressed in his mother’s clothes.

This is one of the best twists in cinema. We were led to believe that Norman’s mom was responsible for the killings. Although, when Sam and Lila meet with the sheriff, he tells them that his mother has been dead. I can imagine that no one in the audience expected that Norman would be the killer and see him in women’s clothing. In the end, Sam, Lila and the sheriff meet with the psychologist and hear his explanation of what’s happening to Norman.

5.      Overall

Psycho is probably one of the best horror movies and best adaptation. What truly makes it such is that it’s a total gamechanger. The film really gambled on the idea of killing a main character and having such a unique plot twist. And Hitchcock achieved with it with some of his connections with television. I feel that what is lost when aspiring horror directors watch Psycho is the slow approach and the paranoia that is imbued in the film. One last thing, do NOT watch the remake from the late 90s with Vince Vaughn, it’s a shot by shot remake that is probably one of the worst remakes ever.

Psycho gets a five out of five. 

Underrated Gems: Drag Me to Hell

It's obvious to no one that today is the first day of October. The whole month will be dedicated to two select horror movies from the 60s to the 90s. With Halloween being dedicated to one from the 2010s. Now, we kick off this exploration with this little gem from the early 2000s. From Sam Raimi who directed the widely regarded Evil Dead and Spider-Man trilogies comes Drag Me to Hell an original underrated film that deserves your attention. SPOILERS will appear in the review.

1.      Story

The film starts with a Mexican family arriving to a house of a medium to help their son. The family say that he hears and sees demons. Compounding the issue is that the family say that the son stole jewelry from gypsies. The medium Shaun San Dena invites them to come and she begins with the séance. The demon pushes everyone including the boy who falls from the second floor to the main floor. Cracks appear from the floor and the family and medium see the boy being dragged down.

Years later, we follow the main protagonist Christine played by Alison Lohman who is working at a bank. We see that she wants the Assistant Manager position but has competition who wants to have that position as well. Her boss Mr. Jacks tells her that she must show that she deserves the position. From there, Mrs. Ganush asks Christine for help since she asks for an extension to have her house from being taken away. Christine denies her an extension which prompts Ganush to plead to the young banker to help her but gets escorted out.

As Christine leaves, Ganush curses Christine with a demon to torment her. She does so by removing a button from her jacket as part of the curse.  Throughout the movie, Christine visits a fortune teller Rahm Jas played by Dileep Rao to see if the demon can be expelled. In the middle of that, the demon terrorizes Christine by creating noises that she only hears. By levitating her and throwing her around her house. And making her nose bleed by spewing tons of blood.

She ultimately decides to take matters in her own hands by trying to pass off her curse to someone else. Rahm tells her that its possible to pass it down to someone. She decided to pass it down to her coworker who wanted the prestigious title at the bank. She changes her mind and goes straight to Ganush’s grave and shove the button down her throat. Thinking that she completed the transfer, Christine visits her boyfriend played by Justin Long at the train station to go out of town. He reveals that he had the cursed button, which causes Christine to fall in the train tracks. Her boyfriend watches in horror as she sees Christine being grabbed by various demons to hell.

2.      The Raimi Touch

It’s no secret that Sam Raimi has a unique touch of directing horror. He makes good use of the quick zoom ins and quick edits of shots. Here, it’s ostensibly Raimi’s film. One of the motifs that I noticed is the use of the Dutch Angle. This camera trick is when the camera slightly tilts one way, and its when a character is experiencing something weird. It happens when the demon comes to terrorize Christine at her house and boyfriend’s parent’s house.

One thing is that this film balances being a horror and a comedic movie. Since the comedy comes from the acts that Christine goes through. Parts of it is hilarious due to the outrageousness of it. For instance, in one scene where Christine goes to her shed, a demon who appears as Ganush scares her. The demon forces its entire arm into Christine’s mouth. Which prompts the woman to cut a rope which has an anvil to crash down on the demon, whose eyes and brain matter splatter to Christine.

I think its one thing where the tone shifts aren’t sharply contrasting where it feels like whiplash. The film does it so wonderfully that it builds the dread and offset it with comedic timing of the situation. I feel that it may alienate some people with that since they want to see a straight up horror movie. To the purists though, it’s exactly what they expect with Sam Raimi.

3.      Justification of Watching Someone Going Through Hell For Our Enjoyment

It’s one thing where we someone gets put through the ringer and we usually get enjoyment and laugh at their expense. Honestly, Christine had it coming throughout the entire movie. She put her own pride instead of helping Mrs. Ganush with her financial problems. As well as admitting that she could’ve helped the old woman.

Also, it’s one thing to feel sympathy for her since she has been cursed. Though, it made clear in my understanding that she’s unlikeable. She constantly lies throughout the movie which doesn’t really help her case. More so when she pleads for help. Like when she goes to the pawn shop and advocate for more money. And when she goes to see Mrs. Ganush to try to help her. Unbeknownst to her that she died. Which makes her attempt to help her all but futile.

I think the biggest takeaway is just the comeuppance that she suffers through. I feel its more of a fable since Christine’s pride of getting a job position swayed her to not help the old lady caused Christine’s problems throughout the film. Like I mentioned earlier, she could have helped her but she wanted the title since she felt she deserved it.

4.      Overall

Is this considered one of Sam Raimi’s best movies. Yes, since for a while in the 2000s he was busy making Spider-Man films for Sony. I think Drag Me to Hell was a statement by Sam Raimi to still flex his chops and say that he still has his horror genes. I have yet to watch his Evil Dead series but this one always gets the backburner for horror movies in the 2000s. So check it out if you want to watch something different.

Drag Me to Hell gets a four out of five.