Hey folks, it’s that wonderful time of the year again, and with it comes my annual 31 Days of Horror Marathon. Every year for the last 4 years or so I’ve watched a new Horror film for every day in the month of October, ranging from Horror Classics like the original HALLOWEEN to modern Foreign Horror flicks like SWITCHBLADE ROMANCE…

I personally credit 28 DAYS LATER for helping revive the Zombie genre, and for that it has secured a very special place in the heart of this particular Zombie lover. So obviously, that means any attempt at a sequel is going to receive major scrutiny from yours truly. I wasn’t convinced at first, especially when I found out that neither Danny Boyle (the original director), Alex Garland (original writer), nor any of the original cast members were returning for this new film. But when I discovered that Spanish filmmaker Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (INTACTO) was going to be helming the new flick, a glimmer of hope sparked. Seeing the trailer gave me more hope, seeing high caliber actors like Robert Carlyle (RAVENOUS) and Catherine McCormack (BRAVEHEART) involved always eases my fears. So did it live up to my cautious-but-optimistic expectations? Kinda. Sorta. Not really… 28 WEEKS LATER takes place – that’s right you guessed it, 28 weeks after the outbreak of the infamous “Rage” virus featured in the original. London is being rebuilt and slowly repopulated. All under the supervision of an American led NATO force. The story centers around a family attempting to reassemble their shattered lives together. A sister and brother return home to a father with a dark and shameful secret. When the man’s wife and his children’s mother is found in a near feral state, somehow surviving a seemingly fatal attack by the Infected months earlier, a military doctor discovers the woman is immune to the Infection. But while the woman shows no symptoms, she still carries the virus within her. As the husband attempts a reconciliation, he unwittingly unleashes the virus upon the small populace of New London. Forced to go to “Code Red”, the military turns their guns on not only the Infected, but uninfected civilians as well. A sniper abandons his post and attempts to save the immune woman’s son, realizing that humanity’s only hope against the virus may be contained in the young boy’s blood.

For all the filmmakers’ pontificating and attempts at double entendres, it’s obvious the ultimate goal of 28 WEEKS LATER is one thing: bloody violence. The film is filled to the gills with copious amounts of glorious gore and flashy explosions, leaving very little room for silly things like detailed character development or motivations. And boy do they overuse that awesome piece of John Murphy music from the end of the first flick in this one. The building momentum featured in the previous installment felt like a roaring locomotive increasing in speed, dangerously close to flying off the rails. Here, every time they want you feel like that, they throw it in, but it never feels as strong. Composer John Murphy provides some new pieces this time out as well, and the new stuff is as great as you would expect. I was also happy to find out that Danny Boyle and Alex Garland (executive producers in this case) both did have some significant involvement with the project, hence the reason the flick isn’t as bad as one would think an unnecessary follow-up would be.

There are a few sequences in particular that really work for me. One is the reunion of husband and wife. The scene is tense with remorse and guilt and, seemingly, redemption, but quickly takes a ghastly turn. (On a side note, and this is complete speculation on my part, but I believe the wife knew she was a “Carrier” and allowed her husband to become infected on purpose. Perhaps simply on a subconscious level at least. I welcome anyone else’s thoughts and opinions on the subject). As the sequence escalates into the insanity it eventually reaches, it’s the lone moment in the film that comes close to emulating the intensity the first film doled out so frequently. Plus there are some pretty cool “Scary” moments, like the subway sequence that takes place completely in the dark. Finally, another sequence I’m fond of is actually the last scattered images that close the film, or the “coda” as the director and producer refer to it. It’s chilling and rather effective, if not a bit predictable.

While 28 WEEKS LATER is certainly not a bad flick (In truth it’s a pretty good exercise in hardcore Horror/Action), the intimacy and resonance the original 28 DAYS LATER showcased is lost amid loud action, shocking gore, and tensile scares. All good stuff mind you, just a bit emotionally lacking when compared to the psychological intensity of the original. Still worth seeing I think, especially if you were a fan of 28 DAYS LATER but wanted more gore and action. For those of you that thought the original had just the right amount of gore and action, well too bad you get more anyway. Just don’t expect the same emotional resonance of the original.

28 WEEKS LATER
Scare-O-Meter: 7
Blood & Guts: 10
Bobert’s Overall Score: 7 – Recommended

Hey folks, it’s that wonderful time of the year again, and with it comes my annual 31 Days of Horror Marathon. Every year for the last 4 years or so I’ve watched a new Horror film for every day in the month of October, ranging from Horror Classics like the original HALLOWEEN to modern Foreign Horror flicks like SWITCHBLADE ROMANCE…

Ok, so I took a few days off from my 31 DAYS OF HORROR Marathon. Every once in a while I have what resembles a social life. But I think I’m making my return to the marathon with a pretty cool flick: THE HOST, a critically acclaimed Monster flick from South Korea. Most mainstream audiences these days probably think that a Monster Movie should strictly be about spectacle, reserved to simply seeing a monster wreck havoc in some city or other setting. It never occurs to them, that perhaps a Monster movie could be a vehicle for a subversive message, a commentary on society that’s as biting as the monster itself. I guess folks forgot that a lot of classic Monster films like GOJIRA (or GODZILLA to us Yankees) were ingeniously disguised as such in order to get across an important message to a mass audience. In the case of GODZILLA, it was a cautionary tale that revealed the folly of Man’s continued attempts to harness the power of the atom, made more relevant with the filmmaker’s hints at the devastation suffered by the city and residents of Hiroshima. Bong Joon-ho’s THE HOST shares this same duplicitous nature, as the filmmakers dish out some major monster scares while always keeping their satirical guns aimed squarely at the heads of the U.S. and South Korean Governments.

When an American Military Pathologist commands a South Korean assistant (who makes little-to-no objections) to pour over a hundred bottles of formaldehyde down the drain because they’re dusty, the toxic chemical makes its way into the Han river and mutates a simple fish into a man-eating monster. When the monster surfaces and goes on the hunt, the dim-witted Gang-du (played by South Korea’s “Tom Cruise”, Song Kang-ho) and his family are dealt a tragic blow when Gang-du’s only daughter is seemingly eaten alive by the carnivorous creature. As they grieve for their loss, the government puts the family under quarantine, fearing a contagious and deadly virus having infected all who have come into contact with the monster. But when a static-y cell phone call leads them to believe that the young girl is still alive, the family makes a daring escape from the hospital. As the Gang-du and his family attempt to find his daughter, they must not only avoid the inept South Korean military, but also an insatiable monster that still roams the sewers they search.

THE HOST is a Monster movie that satisfies on multiple levels, a hybrid of genres that will constantly be throwing the viewer for a loop. One moment the film is as terrifying as JAWS with awe-inspiring CG effects worthy of JURASSIC PARK-like praise, the next its uproariously funny as the family hilariously go overboard with their “mourning”. Its all so overly silly and smartly-placed, its obviously done intentionally and planned accordingly. Which is no surprise, since Joon-ho’s last two films (BARKING DOGS NEVER BITE and MEMORIES OF MURDER) have all featured darkly comic undertones amidst deadly serious subject matter. And boy it must be hard in this day and age to come up with a creature design that is both unique and scary, but the folks behind THE HOST managed to achieve both in spades. And by keeping the monster at a relatively reasonable size, it allows the audience to more easily accept the probability of this creature and its ability to stay hidden from the authorities for as long as it does.

But by far the most entertaining aspect of the film for me personally was watching all of the satirical jabs thrown at various political and societal entities. Sure, the American Military is portrayed as pushy and blindly aggressive bullies, and the South Korean Government comes off as incompetent and terribly complacent, but Joon-ho also pokes some fun at the absent-minded and sanctimonious student protestors. It all comes down to a metaphorical story about the little guy stumbling under the weight of a natural and indifferent threat with no help from an uncaring bureaucratic machine, who finally overcomes these adversaries (or do they?) through sheer strength of will. Now this is a Monster Movie I can sink my own teeth into. Highly recommended for Foreign Film fans and Monster flick lovers.

THE HOST
Scare-O-Meter: 9
Blood & Guts: 8
Bobert’s Overall Score: 9 – Highly Recommended!

Hey folks, it’s that wonderful time of the year again, and with it comes my annual 31 Days of Horror Marathon. Every year for the last 4 years or so I’ve watched a new Horror film for every day in the month of October, ranging from Horror Classics like the original HALLOWEEN to modern Foreign Horror flicks like SWITCHBLADE ROMANCE…

Ok, so I didn’t watch a Horror flick last night. I was tired and I went to bed. So sue me. Instead, I’m gonna talk about a very appropriately named flick I saw a few weeks back. I movie-hopped into Rob Zombie’s HALLOWEEN, figuring that I didn’t want to pay full price because I had a feeling it wasn’t going to be very good. Don’t get me wrong, I think Rob Zombie rocks. I was a little disappointed with HOUSE OF 1,000 CORPSES because I was expecting a far more insane and gory excursion, which it only came close to reaching at the very end with the reveal of Dr. Satan. But his follow-up, THE DEVIL’S REJECTS, was a gloriously gory and depraved piece of cinema that I dug. There are moments in that flick that reach the pure lunacy I’ve only been fortunate enough to see once before, in a little 70’s flick called THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE (still my fav Horror flick of all time). But I hate remakes or “re-imaginings” as they like to call ‘em these days, so Rob Zombie taking on the HALLOWEEN mythos never really appealed to me. That said, I wanted to give it a chance and so I did one Saturday afternoon. All I can say is that I’m glad I didn’t spend any money on this waste of time. The genuine Horror aficionados reading this right now already know the Michael Myers back story, but for the sake of you posers I’ll go ahead and catch you up. Halloween night 1963, little six-year-old Mikey Myers stabs his sister to death with a kitchen knife and is sent to a mental institution where he’s put under the care of psychiatrist Sam Loomis. Fast forward a few years of psycho analysis later, and Dr. Loomis is convinced little Mikey is “purely and simply…EVIL”. Now watching a doped up killer slumped over in some corner probably wouldn’t be very interesting, so Mr. Myers manages to escape the sanitarium and goes back to his old neighborhood to slash up some more nubile girls, and a legend and subgenre (The Slasher flick as its affectionately referred to) was born. Now why would you want to remake that? I mean, how could you and still make it fresh and original without messing up what made it such a classic in the first place? Well Mr. Zombie’s solution to the problem was to include a first-half that examined the days leading up to little Myers’ killing spree, and the missing years between the time he gets institutionalized as a kid and escapes as an adult. Plus, he throws in a lot more kills, a jittery camera, and some artsy shots for good measure. I’m not sure if any of this sounds like a good idea to any of you, but the end result is a pretty derivative, unimaginative, boring, and ultimately needless “reimagining”.

The failure of this film for me boils down to a few simple reasons. First off, the redundancy of redoing the original HALLOWEEN cannot be ignored. If the film offered anything new to the HALLOWEEN mythos, then maybe I could see a reason to take on this endeavor. But really, giving me a back story on Michael Myers as a kid and chronicling his days in an asylum did nothing for me. This stuff was glossed over so quickly in the original for a reason, because it’s not interesting. And Dr. Loomis puts it bluntly and beautifully in the original, Myers is pure evil, no need to try and give me an explanation as to why he is the way he is. The rest of the movie follows the original pretty dang closely, right down to a scene where Michael pins one of his victims to a wall with his big ass knife and stares at the poor bastard as he bleeds out. And there lies the next problem. It was boring and unoriginal, because I’ve already seen all of this before. There’s no worse sin a Horror movie can commit than the deadly sin of boring your audience. As for all the extra killing — well maybe I’m just a desensitized sicko, but I was pretty unimpressed with the “kills” in this flick. Myers walks up to somebody all silent and scary-like, stabs ‘em a few times, and then he’s off to his next victim and does the same thing. There’s no imagination behind these kills, just some big oaf sticking people with a knife over and over again. Guess I’m just spoiled from all the wonderfully creative deaths featured in recent Horror outings like the FINAL DESTINATION flicks and GRINDHOUSE movies. With Rob Zombie behind the helm though, I was really hoping he might inject some of that outright craziness featured in his previous projects. But, alas, that is just not the case here. It’s done with a very by-the-numbers execution, and to me that just ain’t no good.

There are also a few other quibbles I have about the film, mainly to do with some of the acting and dialogue. First off, please don’t cast your wife Sherri Moon in any more roles where she attempts to play “normal”. It just doesn’t work. She rocks as some crazy sexy killer babe, but a mother struggling to deal with a psychopath killer of a son — no I just didn’t buy it. She only does a little better than Tyler Mane’s performance as a hulking-rampaging Michael Myers, and that’s probably cause we didn’t have to hear him growl out any lines like he did in X-MEN as Sabertooth. And what’s with the young actresses in this flick? Granted they’re saddled with having to act like idiots, getting naked every 2 minutes, and screaming their lungs out, but they don’t come anywhere near the girls from the original HALLOWEEN. Scout Taylor-Compton ain’t no Jamie Lee Curtis, and that definitely hurts the flick. Plus, the dialogue is so terribly inane, after a few minutes I was ready to kill the girls myself. Now so that I don’t sound like I’m completely raining poo-poo on Mr. Zombie’s parade, I will mention a couple of things I did like. Let’s start with Sheri Moon Zombie’s stripper scene — just kidding. Seriously though, Zombie always does a stellar job with the music in his flicks, and HALLOWEEN is no exception. Also, he’s smart enough to fill his movies with a bunch of fan favorite genre-centric actors, and this time folks like Malcolm McDowell (CLOCKWORK ORANGE), Ken Foree (DAWN OF THE DEAD), Brad Douriff (CHILD’S PLAY), Sid Haig (SPIDER BABY), Udo Kier (BLOOD FOR DRACULA), Dee Wallace (THE HOWLING), Clint Howard (ICE CREAM MAN), Danny Trejo (FROM DUSK TILL DAWN), and Bill Moseley (THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE 2) all show up and given a few minutes of screentime. You definitely get some brownie points with a Horror fan like me when you do stuff like that.

So to put it bluntly, you’re better than this Rob and you know it. Stay away from the remakes and go back to your crazy Hillbilly Horror stuff. For the rest of you, I’d say check this out if you absolutely LOVE Rob Zombie and HAVE to see everything he puts his hands on. But if you want to see a good HALLOWEEN flick, I’d say just watch John Carpenter’s original Horror classic. Thanks for reading, and feel free as always to share your opinions, comments, and own suggestions for my 31 DAYS OF HORROR MARATHON below!

Rob Zombie’s HALLOWEEN
Scare-O-Meter: 5
Blood & Guts: 7
Bobert’s Overall Score: 5 – Not Recommended

Hey folks, it’s that wonderful time of the year again, and with it comes my annual 31 Days of Horror Marathon. Every year for the last 4 years or so I’ve watched a new Horror film for every day in the month of October, ranging from Horror Classics like the original HALLOWEEN to modern Foreign Horror flicks like SWITCHBLADE ROMANCE…

Last night I watched BUG, the latest from director William Friedkin. With a career spanning several decades, Friedkin is arguably one of American Cinema’s premiere filmmakers. But if he never made another movie ever again, he would still be considered one of the most influential Horror directors of all time simply for one movie: THE EXORCIST. Not only shocking and gloriously gory, it left psychological scars as well. With its horrific portrayal of an innocent young girl’s possession by a violent and vile demon, it burrowed into the audiences’ psyche past and present. Friedkin has mostly stayed away from that particularly disturbing world since, but recently came back to the genre that put his name on the map. And once again, he has contributed a masterpiece of psychological horror. In many a great Horror film, sometimes the scariest monsters aren’t external threats like zombies or werewolves, but rather the demons inside our own minds. The Psychological Horror film is a subgenre of Horror that I gravitate towards more readily than some of the more common and popular sub-categories. There’s something about being afraid of your own mind and the tricks it can play that unnerves me more than any movie about blood sucking vampires or nocturnal boogeymen could. That’s what the new film, BUG, from longtime filmmaker William Friedkin is: An unhinged and disturbing exploration of paranoia and (ultimately) loneliness.

Agnes is a lonely Oklahoma woman living out of a dingy motel room. Still coping with the devastating loss of her 6-year old son, and contending with a persistent paroled ex-husband, the last thing she wants is a romantic relationship. However, she finds herself with a new housemate when a quiet and reserved man named Peter needs a place to stay after a night of hard partying. Surprisingly happy with one another’s company, the two begin developing an intimate and intense relationship. But when Peter begins opening up and rants about Military experiments and bugs growing underneath his skin, Agnes goes against her better judgment and decides in desperation to hold onto her new relationship. Soon the same madness grips her also, and two trap themselves within the motel as they try to unravel the mystery behind the bugs plaguing them.

The term Tour De Force is thrown around so haphazardly these days that it seems to have lost all impact, but BUG is the genuine article. The film runs a gamut of intense emotions that erupt from the screen at every turn. At moments it’s touching and heartbreaking, sometimes funny, downright hilarious even. Only to take a sharp 180-degree turn, getting violent and scary as all hell in a matter of seconds. That’s another intriguing and polarizing aspect of the piece, its unpredictability. It puts you on edge for every frame of the picture, ensuring a healthy dose of uncertainty on the viewer’s side. For some, this element will immediately put them off the material. But for a jaded and seasoned viewer like me, it’s an extremely welcome approach. I absolutely adore that unsettling feeling a good Psychological Horror flick can immerse the viewer in. So many movies, even Horror flicks, play it safe these days and go through familiar routines. It’s amazingly refreshing to see a film go to such disturbing and volatile places without fear of alienating the audience. This is a movie that seems to thrive on making the viewer uncomfortable, and I applaud it for that.

Friedkin is extremely comfortable with the material, tapping into his years of experience to bring a film that seems so utterly simple on the surface, but indisputably has some very complex ideas brewing underneath. He’s also been very “at home” with the violent bits in his previous films, and that’s no different here. It’s sudden, intense, and grisly. Just the way I like it. Originally a Broadway Play, BUG’s playwright Tracy Letts adapted his own script for the screen. The result is a claustrophobic but mesmerizing tale, performed powerfully by its two leads. Ashley Judd has never been much of an actress to me, but that has changed since I’ve seen this flick. She is fearless in her performance, bringing to life a fully realized character that never feels forced or contrived. Her behavior and motivations always ring true, and that’s important as the film enters its surreal 3^rd and last act. But the most intense and scariest performance definitely belongs to Michael Shannon. He seemingly invests everything into this character, giving the viewer an absolutely frightening and violent portrayal of paranoia run amok.

BUG gets my highest possible recommendation; it’s truly a Must-See Psychological excursion. Be warned, the film is disturbing, and it will undoubtedly reach very uncomfortable levels for some viewers as the story plays out, but the rewards are well worth it. It might even give new meaning to the phrase “don’t let the bedbugs bite”. Thanks for reading, and feel free to share your opinions, comments, and own suggestions for my 31 DAYS OF HORROR MARATHON below!

BUG
Scare-O-Meter: 10
Blood & Guts: 8
Bobert’s Overall Score: 10- Must SEE!

Hey folks. It’s that wonderful time of year again, when ghosts and ghouls roam the streets and folks welcome the occassional bloodletting massacre into their homes. It also means its time once again for Bobert’s annual 31 Days of Horror Marathon. Every year for the last 4 years or so I’ve watched a new Horror film everyday in the month of October, ranging from Horror Classics like the original HALLOWEEN to modern Foreign Horror flicks like SWITCHBLADE ROMANCE. This year I decided to get things started with one of the episodes from the MASTERS OF HORROR series that I started digging into last year and enjoyed so much…

Don Coscarelli is another peculiar choice for the MASTERS OF HORRORS series. His contributions to the Horror genre have been sparse, with only two properties that could be classified in that category. Make no mistake; PHANTASM is a classic 70′s spookfest (his subsequent sequels, not-so-much). And BUBBA HO-TEP was (arguably) an instant schlocky cult classic. But besides the hybrid Swords & Sorcery/Horror epic, BEASTMASTER, he hasn’t really done much else to further evolve the art of Horror cinema. Perhaps that’s why his episode for the Horror anthology series seems so keen on defying the conventions of the genre. Based on a short story by Joe R. Lansdale (the original writer of BUBBA HO-TEP), INCIDENT ON AND OFF A MOUNTAIN ROAD presents a different take on a very familiar setup.

On the surface, INCIDENT would appear to be a fairly traditional and by-the-numbers “Damsel in Distress” Horror film cliché. There’s the young woman driving on a lonely mountain road that loses control of her car and becomes stranded in the middle of nowhere, quickly falling into the role of “helpless prey” for a murderous hulking monster of a man. Or does she? INCIDENT’s main draw is its skewing of the genre’s formula. Ellen (played by Bree Turner), the young woman in jeopardy, is far from helpless and at times behaves more like predator than prey. The monster of the show, affectionately referred to as “Moonface”, serves only as a vacant plot device. The main theme of this tale of terror is of survival and of the depths some go to survive, exemplified of course by this young woman’s struggle to survive her ordeal, and the methods she utilizes to fend off her predator. The story of Ellen’s incident on a mountain road is intercut with flashbacks to the events that led up to an unpleasant (to put it mildly) incident off the mountain road that plays a very major part in the film’s conclusion and reveals the true nature of our heroine. The twist is honestly earned, if not totally novel.

Director Don Coscarelli is a highly capable director, “Master of Horror” though, I’m not so sure. It’s obvious from the episode’s tendencies to shy away from the gory details that Coscarelli is never as concerned with the make-up effects and monster aspects of the story, as much as he is about the psychological and thematic aspirations of the piece. Which is not a bad thing necessarily, just a bit disappointing for a gorehound like myself who has enjoyed the grisly contributions to the anthology series from directors John Landis (DEER WOMAN) Takashi Miike (IMPRINT), Dario Argento (JENIFER), Lucky McKee (SICK GIRL), etc. INCIDENT ON AND OFF A MOUNTAIN ROAD is not my favorite entry in the MASTERS OF HORROR series, but it’s certainly worth a look for fans of Coscarelli’s work or any Horror aficionado looking for a different twist on a tried and true formula. Thanks for reading, and as always please feel free to share your opinions, comments, and own suggestions for my 31 DAYS OF HORROR MARATHON!

MASTERS OF HORROR: DON COSCARELLI
INCIDENT ON AND OFF A MOUNTAIN ROAD
Scare-O-Meter: 7
Blood & Guts: 3
Bobert’s Overall Score: 7 – Recommended