City Of The Living Dead

I should probably start off this review by admitting that I've only seen two Lucio Fulci films before this.

Well...sort of.

I only just got around to seeing Zombie sometime last year and didn't really get what the big deal was. I thought it started out great, then it went all...meh. I mean sure, there's that gnarly zombie versus shark scene and juicy eyeball piercing, but other than that...I thought it was pretty damn boring.

There, I said it. So shoot me.

And then there's House by the Cemetery, a film I have a very tumultuous relationship with. Having had it on VHS since I was a young'un, I first popped the tape into the VCR when I was about 13 years old...and only got about twenty minutes in before giving up. This happened once again a couple years later. And again a few more years after that. And then again. And again. And still, to this day, I have yet to watch this cruddy film in it's entirety.

The name John Carpenter is synonymous with Michael Myers. Wes Craven with Freddy Krueger. But what comes to mind when I think of Lucio Fulci? None other than...

...Bob?

Anyway, the obvious point I'm trying to make here is that I always thought Fulci was kind of a joke. And even so, other than my love for Suspiria, I'm not too big on Italian horror in general and tend to avoid them as best I can. So when Stacie Ponder (of the Final Girl blog) chose City of the Living Dead as her next Film Club addition, I wasn't too excited to participate. But as a big-time fan of Ms. Ponder and her blog, I figured...why not? I'll give it a try. Surely I'm being too hard on Fulci, right?

Now comes the part where I give myself a kick in the pants for avoiding this film all these years. City of the Living Dead is totally awesome!

Starting off on an eerie note, the film opens with a séance gone wrong as a psychic drops dead after having visions of a gloomy priest hanging himself in a cemetery in the strange little town of Dunwich. When a reporter (played by the icky Christopher George) catches wind of the psychic's odd departure, he becomes intrigued and tracks down her freshly buried coffin to...umm...to look for...umm...What the heck was he looking for? What was he expecting to find there, other than a mound of dirt? Anyway, just as he's about to leave (after surprisingly finding nothing), he hears something a bit fishy.

Did he hear scratching? Banging? Screaming?!

Realizing the psychic has been buried alive, he frees her from her coffin with a pickaxe (and almost kills her in the process, the dumbass), and then gets some very vague information out of her about how the world is about to come to an end. Apparently, the priest's suicide has caused the gates of hell to open and now it's up to them to find this Dunwich town and somehow put a stop to it. And the problem is, they only have about 48 hours to complete their task, otherwise the gates will remain open forever and all the dead will rise from their graves. Of course the 48 hour limit on their lives doesn't stop the two from exchanging flirty glances and stopping for a bite to eat on their way there. They truly seemed concerned.

As you can probably tell, City of the Living Dead is certainly not without it's faults. There are a few characters that are severely underdeveloped and we're never quite sure of their purpose in the film. Christopher George's character is there to chew cigars and look sleazy, so he's obviously needed (Or maybe his purpose is to investigate and stuffs, cause he's  reporter and all. I don't know). And the psychic seems to be the only one who really knows what's happening. But what's with all the other characters? Who are these people?

There's one particular character named Bob (no, not that Bob from House by the Cemetery, thank god) who's a complete mystery. He literally has no purpose. He's not even there as a victim. Well, he does get killed, but not by a zombie or a ghost or whathaveyou, but instead by some random dude who doesn't like Bob hanging around with his daughter... or something. What does this have to do with anything? Nothing at all, as far as I can tell, but who really cares when it ends in a drill to the head?

The dead priest, now a ghost, is also quite vague, but a pretty cool villain nonetheless. I mean, he kinda seemed like a douche. He kept popping up at random, still dangling lifelessly from his noose, right before quickly vanishing into thin air. What a total mindfuck, right? And as if that wasn't enough, he also seemed to enjoy causing people to puke up their innards just by staring intently into their eyes.

Awesome. But gross. If there's one thing that makes Italian horror stand out from the rest, it's the excruciatingly dragged-out, bloody deaths. You gotta love it! It actually kinda nauseated me a bit.

Why did this priest kill himself in the first place? Why does he now have supernatural powers? Why did his death cause the gates of hell to open? How exactly did the psychic get buried alive?

Okay, so by now it's become painfully obvious that Italian filmmakers don't care much for logic (Or maybe that just applies to Italians in general, in which case my existence suddenly makes perfect sense). There's a huge list of unanswered questions presented in this film and most of it is likely to confuse the crap out of you. Maybe I'm being too forgiving, but frankly, I found it easy to dismiss the many faults and enjoyed it for what it was.

Much like the films of Dario Argento, City of the Living Dead makes good use of the surreal in every which way. From phantom flames to demonic growls, from swarms of maggots to bleeding walls, Fulci handled each scene with stylish bizarreness, resulting in a trippy, hypnotic nightmare. And in that regard, it works. I mean, who needs substance when you have so much style, not to mention transporting zombies who rip brains out of people's skulls with their bare hands?

I guess I was sorta wrong about Fulci after all. He's a decent dude. Then again, it's really hard to ignore House By The Cemetery. And Bob. But whatevs. This movie kicked all kinds of ass.

RATING:

City Of The Living Dead

I should probably start off this review by admitting that I've only seen two Lucio Fulci films before this.

Well...sort of.

I only just got around to seeing Zombie sometime last year and didn't really get what the big deal was. I thought it started out great, then it went all...meh. I mean sure, there's that gnarly zombie versus shark scene and juicy eyeball piercing, but other than that...I thought it was pretty damn boring.

There, I said it. So shoot me.

And then there's House by the Cemetery, a film I have a very tumultuous relationship with. Having had it on VHS since I was a young'un, I first popped the tape into the VCR when I was about 13 years old...and only got about twenty minutes in before giving up. This happened once again a couple years later. And again a few more years after that. And then again. And again. And still, to this day, I have yet to watch this cruddy film in it's entirety.

The name John Carpenter is synonymous with Michael Myers. Wes Craven with Freddy Krueger. But what comes to mind when I think of Lucio Fulci? None other than...

...Bob?

Anyway, the obvious point I'm trying to make here is that I always thought Fulci was kind of a joke. And even so, other than my love for Suspiria, I'm not too big on Italian horror in general and tend to avoid them as best I can. So when Stacie Ponder (of the Final Girl blog) chose City of the Living Dead as her next Film Club addition, I wasn't too excited to participate. But as a big-time fan of Ms. Ponder and her blog, I figured...why not? I'll give it a try. Surely I'm being too hard on Fulci, right?

Now comes the part where I give myself a kick in the pants for avoiding this film all these years. City of the Living Dead is totally awesome!

Starting off on an eerie note, the film opens with a séance gone wrong as a psychic drops dead after having visions of a gloomy priest hanging himself in a cemetery in the strange little town of Dunwich. When a reporter (played by the icky Christopher George) catches wind of the psychic's odd departure, he becomes intrigued and tracks down her freshly buried coffin to...umm...to look for...umm...What the heck was he looking for? What was he expecting to find there, other than a mound of dirt? Anyway, just as he's about to leave (after surprisingly finding nothing), he hears something a bit fishy.

Did he hear scratching? Banging? Screaming?!

Realizing the psychic has been buried alive, he frees her from her coffin with a pickaxe (and almost kills her in the process, the dumbass), and then gets some very vague information out of her about how the world is about to come to an end. Apparently, the priest's suicide has caused the gates of hell to open and now it's up to them to find this Dunwich town and somehow put a stop to it. And the problem is, they only have about 48 hours to complete their task, otherwise the gates will remain open forever and all the dead will rise from their graves. Of course the 48 hour limit on their lives doesn't stop the two from exchanging flirty glances and stopping for a bite to eat on their way there. They truly seemed concerned.

As you can probably tell, City of the Living Dead is certainly not without it's faults. There are a few characters that are severely underdeveloped and we're never quite sure of their purpose in the film. Christopher George's character is there to chew cigars and look sleazy, so he's obviously needed (Or maybe his purpose is to investigate and stuffs, cause he's  reporter and all. I don't know). And the psychic seems to be the only one who really knows what's happening. But what's with all the other characters? Who are these people?

There's one particular character named Bob (no, not that Bob from House by the Cemetery, thank god) who's a complete mystery. He literally has no purpose. He's not even there as a victim. Well, he does get killed, but not by a zombie or a ghost or whathaveyou, but instead by some random dude who doesn't like Bob hanging around with his daughter... or something. What does this have to do with anything? Nothing at all, as far as I can tell, but who really cares when it ends in a drill to the head?

The dead priest, now a ghost, is also quite vague, but a pretty cool villain nonetheless. I mean, he kinda seemed like a douche. He kept popping up at random, still dangling lifelessly from his noose, right before quickly vanishing into thin air. What a total mindfuck, right? And as if that wasn't enough, he also seemed to enjoy causing people to puke up their innards just by staring intently into their eyes.

Awesome. But gross. If there's one thing that makes Italian horror stand out from the rest, it's the excruciatingly dragged-out, bloody deaths. You gotta love it! It actually kinda nauseated me a bit.

Why did this priest kill himself in the first place? Why does he now have supernatural powers? Why did his death cause the gates of hell to open? How exactly did the psychic get buried alive?

Okay, so by now it's become painfully obvious that Italian filmmakers don't care much for logic (Or maybe that just applies to Italians in general, in which case my existence suddenly makes perfect sense). There's a huge list of unanswered questions presented in this film and most of it is likely to confuse the crap out of you. Maybe I'm being too forgiving, but frankly, I found it easy to dismiss the many faults and enjoyed it for what it was.

Much like the films of Dario Argento, City of the Living Dead makes good use of the surreal in every which way. From phantom flames to demonic growls, from swarms of maggots to bleeding walls, Fulci handled each scene with stylish bizarreness, resulting in a trippy, hypnotic nightmare. And in that regard, it works. I mean, who needs substance when you have so much style, not to mention transporting zombies who rip brains out of people's skulls with their bare hands?

I guess I was sorta wrong about Fulci after all. He's a decent dude. Then again, it's really hard to ignore House By The Cemetery. And Bob. But whatevs. This movie kicked all kinds of ass.

RATING:

LaDonna Don't Like That: Attack Of The Evil Kitties

Call me naive, but I was always under the impression that kitties are supposed to be like this:

But apparently, they're more like this:

...according to horror movies, at least. These kitties just love to wait for the most inappropriate moment—you know, the moment when it gets really dark and quiet and you're fearing for your life—and then they jump out at you, hissing, and you suddenly find yourself in dire need of clean pantaloons.

Such jerks.

In the world of horror movies, this supposedly happens at least once a day, sometimes even twice a day, to pretty much everyone on the planet. And although it may work at scaring the crap out of the characters, it sure doesn't seem to work on the audience.

Having any sort of false scare in a horror movie already gets on my nerves as is; You can sense these moments coming from miles away and they're never actually scary because you know it's going to amount to nothing. But I guess, regardless of how unnecessary I think they are, you just can't have a horror movie without at least one false scare to keep everyone on edge...but why do they always have to be delivered by kitties?

Are horror filmmakers really lacking in creativity that much? Why can't they ever change it up a bit? Why not have a dog jump out? Or better yet, a frog or even a kangaroo? They seem to enjoy jumping, so that might be more appropriate.

But no. It always has be kitties.

I HATE THAT!!! And LaDonna don't like that shit either...

LaDonna Don't Like That: Attack Of The Evil Kitties

Call me naive, but I was always under the impression that kitties are supposed to be like this:

But apparently, they're more like this:

...according to horror movies, at least. These kitties just love to wait for the most inappropriate moment—you know, the moment when it gets really dark and quiet and you're fearing for your life—and then they jump out at you, hissing, and you suddenly find yourself in dire need of clean pantaloons.

Such jerks.

In the world of horror movies, this supposedly happens at least once a day, sometimes even twice a day, to pretty much everyone on the planet. And although it may work at scaring the crap out of the characters, it sure doesn't seem to work on the audience.

Having any sort of false scare in a horror movie already gets on my nerves as is; You can sense these moments coming from miles away and they're never actually scary because you know it's going to amount to nothing. But I guess, regardless of how unnecessary I think they are, you just can't have a horror movie without at least one false scare to keep everyone on edge...but why do they always have to be delivered by kitties?

Are horror filmmakers really lacking in creativity that much? Why can't they ever change it up a bit? Why not have a dog jump out? Or better yet, a frog or even a kangaroo? They seem to enjoy jumping, so that might be more appropriate.

But no. It always has be kitties.

I HATE THAT!!! And LaDonna don't like that shit either...

Home For The Holidays

After receiving a strange letter from their father, four sisters reluctantly return to their childhood home, an apparent hotspot for gothic family controversy, and find him bed-ridden, on the verge of pushing up daisies. While their stepmother Elizabeth (Julie Harris of The Haunting) claims he’s just dying of old age, their father has a different story. He believes Elizabeth is slowly poisoning him to death and wants his daughters to “get rid of her” themselves instead of contacting the police. Although the girls seem to hate their stepmother, they’re quick to dismiss their father’s story as nothing but paranoia brought on by senility. But everything soon changes when a bad storm traps them inside and a killer starts trimming the family tree.

Get it? The family tree? Cause it takes place at Christmas? GET IT?

Oh man, I'm so lame. But anyway...

Predating all the well known holiday-themed slashers, Home For Holidays not only features an Oscar caliber cast, including a young Sally Field, but was even penned by Psycho screenwriter Joseph Stephano and produced by Aaron Spelling!!!

Need I say more? Probably not, but I'm gonna continue anyway.

Home For the Holidays is quite the intriguing little mystery that hooks us right from the start and never lets go. Although the characterization is fairly minimal, it’s still effective as each sister is clearly defined and made easy targets for suspicion. Alex is the Big Sister type who seems mentally exhausted from having to keep the whole family together; Joanna is a sort of callous jetsetter who’s been through more than a couple husbands and doesn’t seem to care for anyone but herself; Christine (Sally Field) is the sweet but naive baby of the bunch and Frederica (the sublimely creepy Jessica Walter from Clint Eastwood’s Play Misty For Me) is an emotionally damaged alcoholic pill-popper.

Why is Frederica so unstable? Why do the sisters seem so distant from their father? Why do they have such strong hatred for their stepmother and why is she supposedly trying to kill her husband? It’s all so juicy, isn’t it? And it just gets better and better with bits of backstory and twists thrown into the mix as it goes along. This couldn’t possibly be anything but an Aaron Spelling production and I just LOVE it!!! With so much already going for it, the eventual appearance of a slicker wearing killer with a pitchfork just comes off as icing on the cake.

Of course, since it’s made for TV, there isn’t much slasher action to be seen here. The deaths are pretty quick and bloodless but it doesn’t really matter. I was more interested in the killer’s identity rather than the slayings. Aside from the sisters, Julie Harris does an amazing job seeming like she’s full of dark secrets and potentially dangerous. Even the bed-ridden father can’t seem to be trusted. So who could the killer be? It’s very refreshing to see a whodunit that actually works. Director John Llewellyn Moxey, a pro with TV horror, does well keeping us second guessing ourselves and building the tension right to the very end.

Isn’t Christmas just the perfect time for horror? The extreme euphoria of it all somehow creates the opposite intended effect, making us feel fearful instead of joyful. But aside from the requisite Christmas tree and an eerily festive score, this home doesn’t exactly express the holiday spirit, which was quite disappointing. We even have to settle for rain instead of snow. And while thunder and lightning are always great bedfellows to horror, it just seems a bit odd for a Christmas movie.

Home For The Holidays may not be ideal for some slasher fans, lacking the proper atmosphere, gore and nudity, but with Aaron Spelling drenched intrigue and the Flying Nun, who gives a crap what it lacks? This hidden gem is surely worth seeking out.

RATING:

Home For The Holidays

After receiving a strange letter from their father, four sisters reluctantly return to their childhood home, an apparent hotspot for gothic family controversy, and find him bed-ridden, on the verge of pushing up daisies. While their stepmother Elizabeth (Julie Harris of The Haunting) claims he’s just dying of old age, their father has a different story. He believes Elizabeth is slowly poisoning him to death and wants his daughters to “get rid of her” themselves instead of contacting the police. Although the girls seem to hate their stepmother, they’re quick to dismiss their father’s story as nothing but paranoia brought on by senility. But everything soon changes when a bad storm traps them inside and a killer starts trimming the family tree.

Get it? The family tree? Cause it takes place at Christmas? GET IT?

Oh man, I'm so lame. But anyway...

Predating all the well known holiday-themed slashers, Home For Holidays not only features an Oscar caliber cast, including a young Sally Field, but was even penned by Psycho screenwriter Joseph Stephano and produced by Aaron Spelling!!!

Need I say more? Probably not, but I'm gonna continue anyway.

Home For the Holidays is quite the intriguing little mystery that hooks us right from the start and never lets go. Although the characterization is fairly minimal, it’s still effective as each sister is clearly defined and made easy targets for suspicion. Alex is the Big Sister type who seems mentally exhausted from having to keep the whole family together; Joanna is a sort of callous jetsetter who’s been through more than a couple husbands and doesn’t seem to care for anyone but herself; Christine (Sally Field) is the sweet but naive baby of the bunch and Frederica (the sublimely creepy Jessica Walter from Clint Eastwood’s Play Misty For Me) is an emotionally damaged alcoholic pill-popper.

Why is Frederica so unstable? Why do the sisters seem so distant from their father? Why do they have such strong hatred for their stepmother and why is she supposedly trying to kill her husband? It’s all so juicy, isn’t it? And it just gets better and better with bits of backstory and twists thrown into the mix as it goes along. This couldn’t possibly be anything but an Aaron Spelling production and I just LOVE it!!! With so much already going for it, the eventual appearance of a slicker wearing killer with a pitchfork just comes off as icing on the cake.

Of course, since it’s made for TV, there isn’t much slasher action to be seen here. The deaths are pretty quick and bloodless but it doesn’t really matter. I was more interested in the killer’s identity rather than the slayings. Aside from the sisters, Julie Harris does an amazing job seeming like she’s full of dark secrets and potentially dangerous. Even the bed-ridden father can’t seem to be trusted. So who could the killer be? It’s very refreshing to see a whodunit that actually works. Director John Llewellyn Moxey, a pro with TV horror, does well keeping us second guessing ourselves and building the tension right to the very end.

Isn’t Christmas just the perfect time for horror? The extreme euphoria of it all somehow creates the opposite intended effect, making us feel fearful instead of joyful. But aside from the requisite Christmas tree and an eerily festive score, this home doesn’t exactly express the holiday spirit, which was quite disappointing. We even have to settle for rain instead of snow. And while thunder and lightning are always great bedfellows to horror, it just seems a bit odd for a Christmas movie.

Home For The Holidays may not be ideal for some slasher fans, lacking the proper atmosphere, gore and nudity, but with Aaron Spelling drenched intrigue and the Flying Nun, who gives a crap what it lacks? This hidden gem is surely worth seeking out.

RATING:

Prom Night, Scary Night

"Hello?"

"Is anybody here?"

 "..."

"AHHHH!!! I don't wanna die!!!"

"Oh, wait. Nevermind. That's just a TABLE LAMP."

When the biggest scare of a movie comes from a table lamp...I think it's safe to say that movie should not exist.

Just sayin'.

Prom Night, Scary Night

"Hello?"

"Is anybody here?"

 "..."

"AHHHH!!! I don't wanna die!!!"

"Oh, wait. Nevermind. That's just a TABLE LAMP."

When the biggest scare of a movie comes from a table lamp...I think it's safe to say that movie should not exist.

Just sayin'.

WALLPAPER: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

(CLICK FOR FULL SIZE)

This is a custom desktop wallpaper I made for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I was inspired to make this by the hand-drawn Italian theatrical poster for the film.

I couldn't really come up with anything specific for the design, so I kept it fairly simple. I admit it's nothing special, but Leatherface looks awesome and I love the atmospheric colors and tones I used.

It totally gets my zipper going.

WALLPAPER: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

(CLICK FOR FULL SIZE)

This is a custom desktop wallpaper I made for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I was inspired to make this by the hand-drawn Italian theatrical poster for the film.

I couldn't really come up with anything specific for the design, so I kept it fairly simple. I admit it's nothing special, but Leatherface looks awesome and I love the atmospheric colors and tones I used.

It totally gets my zipper going.

The Human Centipede

Me no likey centipedes. I'm so disgusted by them that the mere mention of the word "centipede" drives me nucking futs. I even have this weird paranoid delusion that these little spawn-of-Satan insects can actually sense my fear and will appear if I think about them too much or say the word "centipede" out loud, like saying "Candyman" five times in front of a mirror.

It's ridic, I know.

So needless to say, I was already convinced The Human Centipede was going to be the most disgusting movie I would ever see, just based on the title alone. Then I actually read up on it and realized it was about ass-to-mouth shenanigans in Germany...

Eventually I came to and braced myself for what I assumed would be a feature-length version of 2 Girls, 1 Cup. And then I watched it and BAM!....

Nothing. No vomit. Not even a little dry heave.

How disappointing to find out this movie is actually incredibly tame. And that's a bit confusing to me. I mean, if you're gonna make a movie called The Human Centipede involving characters getting down and dirty in each others asses, then actually make it disgusting or what's the point, right?

When the movie begins, we're introduced to a couple of young, ditsy American women on a road trip through Europe. Currently traveling through Germany, they hear word of a big party, get directions and hit the road. On their way there, they inevitably get lost and end up stranded with a flat tire and yada yada yada, they knock on the wrong door for help. Luckily for us, the owner of said wrong door just so happens to be Mr. Mad Scientist who's obsessed with sewing peoples mouths onto other peoples anuses. Who would have thunk it?

By doing this procedure, it creates a single digestive track that runs through all the people fused together. So it basically creates one long person with lots of legs and arms, like a centipede. Get it? Now, according to the theatrical poster, it states that this film is 100% medically accurate. Umm...yeah, okay. Really? I mean, when you eat something, doesn't your body soak up all the nutrients (or, you know, whatevs) and then crap out the leftover stuff that your body doesn't need? So when the second and third people in the chain get fed the first person's crap, wouldn't that not work, in terms of nutrition? I don't get it. I guess I'm wrong, then. I don't know.

Before the procedure is done, there's a slight bit of suspense, I suppose, as one of the women gets free from her restraints and tries to escape. But I think it's safe to assume she doesn't. So the attempt at suspense here is pretty pointless. And then once the two women and a frantic Asian dude are fused together, it basically becomes How To Train Your Human Centipede. Mr. Mad Scientist even tries to get the Human Centipede to bring him the newspaper, as if it were a dog, which is kind of...well, stupid. I mean, why would you create a human centipede just to make is act like an frickin dog? That kinda seems like a waste if ya ask me. But anyway, after all this training bullcrap, the "suspense" picks up once more, but again, it all seems fairly pointless for obvious reasons.

For the most part, The Human Centipede, while being oddly entertaining, is merely a disgusting and disturbing concept and not much else. We never get the expected goods. Instead, we just get lots of crying, crawling and tremendously bad acting/dialogue. Let's just say it's lucky for us that the women had anuses stuck to their mouths for the better part of the film. Unfortunately, no such luck with Mr. Mad Scientist, allowing him one seriously over-the-top performance. But then again, he is a mad scientist after all. So I guess that's sort of his shtick.

Writer/director Tom Six has actually planned for this film to be the first in a trilogy. And while I can't quite imagine how this storyline could possibly expand into two more films, I guess that might explain why it felt like too much of a setup with no real payoff. I suppose the sequels will be the real payoff. Now we just have to wait and see.

RATING: