FILM REVIEW: Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (Producer's Cut) (1995)

Let me start off by saying that I’ve never cared for the theatrical version of The Curse of Michael Myers.  My big complaint is that like The Return of Michael Myers and The Revenge of Michael Myers, Michael is an oaf. It would appear that while Season of the Witch was being made, Michael hit the gym hard on his time off and grew a few inches. Michael went from a normal sized guy to a pro wrestler, and the reason for this is because of Moustapha Akkad wanted to compete with Jason Voorhees. Where Akkad went wrong was ever trying to compare the Halloween series to an imitation. I also am not privy to the ugly mask nor its size. And I despise the ridiculous Thorn crap among other things. So, going into this Unrated Producer’s Cut (originally known as Halloween 666), I definitely wasn’t excited, but I was thinking it had to be better…

FILM REVIEW: The Expendables 3 (2014)

I'm pretty sure everyone my age is still caught up in the new TMNT flick and Guardians of the Galaxy, because my fiance and I sat in the back row of an empty theater Saturday, the only other people in the whole showing were five or six people who were all geriatric. I would be lying if I said that I expected much from this installment in the Expendables series, but I'm at the very least pleased that it's better then the dreadful 2012 sequel. You have to understand who these films are aimed at in order to truly appreciate them. If you still have a knack for 80's cheesy action motion pictures (the way that I do with 80's horror) with a cliche plot full of no story and tends to be overly loud, then the good news is that you'll more than likely "dig" this. So when watching, try to put on your 'I have to remember to forgive all these flaws I'm about to see because it's a senseless action flick' glasses (that they don't give you with your ticket purchase), so you can take it in properly. Unfortunately, I left my glasses at home...

Throwback Thursday Review: 'HELLO MARY LOU: PROM NIGHT II' (1987)

In a genre where follow-up movies are especially known for "milking the cow", Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II is one of the greatest horror sequels ever made. I've said that since I saw it, and I still stand by that. Though it's not as dark or tragic, this always has and will give Carrie a run for it's money. Someone from the Village Voice once said that "it's like a Brian DePalma movie for slasher fans", furthering my point that it stands toe to toe with Carrie, and in my opinion is superior. For those of you who don't know, Brian DePalma is the director of the original Carrie, but is most known for his masterpiece starring Al Pacino, Scarface. This stand alone sequel in the Prom Night series is directed by Bruce Pittman who's been around the game for a while. His last directorial effort was in 2012 called The Last Movie, and while I've never seen any of Pittman's other works, this is enough for me to respect the mans talent. Even if all of his other work is throwaway stuff (which I'm not saying it is, I'm just saying...), he knocked this one motion picture out of the park. The cast offers Lisa Schrage (Food of the Gods II), Michael Ironside (Scanners), and Wendy Lyon (Warehouse 13 TV Series) in this supernatural tale of a prom night from hell as Mary Lou, a victim who died in 1957 at her school prom, returns 30 years later to wreck havoc and get revenge.

'JOYRIDE 3: ROADKILL' is relentlessly brutal

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS

In the third installment in the Joy Ride series, we get a bloody (no pun intended) good sequel. This time around, a group of street racers who take a short cut to a race rally antagonize the vicious truck driver, Rusty Nail, and he won't stop hunting them until they all die gruesome deaths. Directed by Declan O' Brien (Shartopus) and starring Ken Kirzinger (Freddy Vs. Jason), Jesse Hutch (Smallville), and Ben Hollingsworth (Coming Home for Christmas).

PARANORMAL ACTIVITY: THE MARKED ONES misses its mark

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 84 Mins
WRITER(S)- Christopher Landon
STARRING- Andrew Jacobs, Jorge Diaz, and Gabrielle Walsh
DIRECTOR- Christopher Landon



Synopsis taken from IMDb
Jesse begins experiencing a number of disturbing and unexplainable things after the death of his neighbor. As he investigates, it isn't long before Jesse finds he's been marked for possession by a malevolent demonic entity, and it's only a matter of time before he is completely under its control.




Oh boy, where do I begin. This spin-off and fifth installment in the "Paranormal Activity" series is directed by Christopher Landon. Landon only has one other film to his credit directorial wise, and that's "Burning Palms" from back in 2010, which didn't get favorable reviews. This mark in the paranormal franchise is just plain weak. I was really hoping that they'd pick it up a bit after the mess that was "Paranormal Activity 4", but they dropped the ball again, and this time it's even worse.

"The Marked Ones" isn't scary at all. There isn't a single scene where I was the slightest bit scared or even amused. It's not suspenseful, and it relies on quick and cheap jump-scares even more than the previous films. It's the same recycled stuff over and over again. It really makes me wonder if they're honestly even trying anymore. I mean, it's totally amateur looking.

I know that these films aren't made in a lot of time, and I know that they aren't too costly. But, you can really start to see it now. This movie looks like it cost $100 to make. The whole concept is dead, and if they're going to try and keep this thing going, they're gonna have to reinvent the entire concept and get real creative. In my honest opinion, this installment in the series pulled the plug on a series that was surviving off life support. It really begs the question of how are they not straight to video movies by now?

The makeup effects and cgi are honestly laughable. I receive screeners for some independent films with almost no budget that have better makeup effects than the work done in this. Overwhelmingly underwhelming FX to say the least...

 And the characters aren't even likable. The lead characters are total morons and annoying. Stupid characters doing stupid things. What do you do when a demonic entity is catching you when you fall backwards? Apparently, according to the idiots in this movie, you make a great time of it and have jolly good laughs.

When briefly discussing time travel, Hector, the lead character Jesse's best friend, says "I'd time travel to the Bahamas." What the hell? I'm pretty sure genius Hector was thinking of teleporting. This whole ad libbing mess has got to stop if this is what the actors are saying. Again, were they even trying?

The Ouija board is out, and Simon Says is in, didn't you hear? Yeah in this flick the source of contacting the demon is through a Simon Says. Stupidity at its finest. Lame. I'd be ashamed to have my name on this movie.

The ending makes sense, and ties in with the ending of the very first "Paranormal Activity" film. However, it leaves a lot of questions unanswered. So I predict we'll be getting some answers in the next film, but I honestly don't care enough anymore at this point to find out the answers. They say you've jumped the shark once you cross a line, well this film just takes you to the ghetto and possesses one dimensional characters.

I'm gonna steal a line from Elvira here and say that this flick is "about an hour and a half too long".

.5 stars out of 5

THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

RATED- PG-13
RUN TIME- 112 Mins
WRITER(S)- Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, and Stephen McFeely
STARRING- Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, and Tom Hiddleston 
DIRECTOR- Alan Taylor 



Synopsis taken from IMDb
When Jane Foster is possessed by a great power, Thor must protect her from a new threat of old times: The Dark Elves.




Right before the first "Thor" film landed in 2011, I ran to my local comic shop and grabbed a stack of Thor comics. 13 to be exact. I've never read about Thor, nor had any interest in doing so, but I wanted to do my homework and get ready for the film. Although I wasn't impressed with the comics, the film was entertaining for me, and I liked it more than some of Marvel's other productions. So yeah, the movie kinda made me a fan of the character, but I'm by no means claiming to be enthralled by it.

This time around, the hammer toting God (Chris Hemsworth), is back in a fierce and gritty sequel that takes things to a whole new height of epic proportions. This maintained a childish tone so kids can like it, but it's really dark and not what most people expected. I really like that this didn't get off track by trying to appeal to children. This is a film that keeps it's balls while staying likable to younger crowds.

Despite all the cgi and the unnecessary one-liners, this actually turned out to be a damn good sequel. And Loki (Tom Hiddleston) was actually my favorite part! For such an unlikable scumbag, I'm getting used to his antics and starting to see some appeal in the character. I also think that this time around, some effort was really spent on making you see a new side of him that makes him likable.

Once Thor's love interest, Jane (Natalie Portman) becomes possessed by the Aether, a weapon that is used by the dark elves to destroy the universe, things become complicated. Trying to find answers as well as save the woman he loves, Thor must call on his deceptive little brother to help him. Seeing Thor and Loki work together really makes you wish they weren't enemies, because they're a damn good team.

Asgard, home of Thor and his father Odin, is attacked savagely by the Dark Elves, and they make their point loud and clear, sending a message to all of Asgard. We get a little peak of what's to come as there's some scattered action battles, but nothing like the ending in which things get real thrilling. As a matter of fact the very end, right before the credits is probably my favorite scene in the movie. I expected it, but I didn't. Hard to explain, but I'm glad it ended like it did.

One thing that I find disappointing about comic films is that certain people are safe. There's always a looming danger, yet everyone always makes it out alive and kicking. Just like how in kids movies there's always a death that lasts about two and a half seconds before it's revealed that by some magical way they've survived and aren't going to die. I find that to be a  real bummer about films like this, and it's what is truly stopping them from reaching their potential greatness. And when someone is killed it's small characters that aren't really needed anyway. They're just kept around for comedic entertainment and have outlived their purpose for the story.

And I'm over the love story part of all these types of movies. I understand having love interests, but it's just too much! It seems every superhero has their head half up some girls ass and the other half is trying to save the world. I just wish that every superhero movie didn't have to end with a cheesy hug and kiss. I think that although there's still some creativity left in  comic book movie films, it's still becoming a bit repetitive. And I hope someone can come along and change that, before that light burns out for good.

Somebody needs to think of something new to start doing in these comic movies that makes them not so easy to predict. Ones that do, like The Dark Knight Trilogy, stand out higher above the rest.

"Thor: The Dark World" is a fun and tense ride, but don't expect to much from it. Or instead of being surprised, you'll be left hanging. For what it is, a movie about a God fighting evil elves, it's pretty good. After a second viewing, I think I'd place it above the first film.

3 out of 5 stars

FRIGHT NIGHT 2: NEW BLOOD Is Not a Bite You Want

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 100 MINS
WRITER(S)- MATT VENNE
STARRING- WILL PAYNE, JAIME MURRAY, AND SEAN POWER
DIRECTOR- EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ 



Synopsis taken from IMDb
By day Gerri Dandridge is a sexy professor, but by night, she transforms into a real-life vampire with an unquenchable thirst for human blood. So when a group of high school students travel abroad to study in Romania, they find themselves ensnared in Gerri's chilling web of lust and terror. Charley and "Evil" Ed must stop Gerri from drinking and bathing in the blood of a "new moon virgin," which just so happens to be Charley's ex-girlfriend, Amy. They enlist help from Peter Vincent, the vampire hunting host of a reality show called "Fright Night," to drive a stake through Gerri's plan and save Amy from a fate far worse than death. 

The original "Fright Night" (1985) is my second favorite vampire film ever, has been since I can remember, right behind "The Lost Boys" (1987). I didn't mind the "Fright Night" remake back in 2011, either.Granted, it wasn't the original in any comparison, but they did a good job with keeping you entertained. It was a fun movie.

Much to my surprise, the new film, is more of a remake than a sequel. I did not know this, nor expect it. I saw the redband trailer a few months back, and that's all I knew going into it. And honestly, I was expecting good things, after being pleased with the remake. I knew by the trailer that this new movie was going to have some nods to the original, such as the vampire moving next door, and the lead  vampire's name being Gerri. I never thought this was going to be another retelling, and not a follow-up to the 2011 flick.

Truth be told, I knew I was in trouble within the first 10 minutes. There's a good jump before the opening credits, but after that, you can instantly see the change in quality it takes. When we get character time with Charley (Will Payne) and "Evil" Ed (Chris Waller), it's very clear the acting is poor, and not believable. The dialogue was almost as lacking as the performances. Right here, as I aforementioned, I knew I was in trouble.

Reason being; you can't set up a good story that's heavily character induced, when the actors and actresses can't pull the roles off. If they're laughable, and or unbelievable, than the whole feel of the film is shot to hell. Such is the case with this, unfortunately. I was even disappointed in Jaime Murray's acting as the lead vamp, Gerri Dandridge. 

I've somewhat followed her career after seeing her on season 2 of Showtime's "Dexter", which is my all-time favorite show. But, this movie isn't her best body of work...

With basically the whole premise of the original movie, from back in 1985, "Fright Night 2: New Blood" hardly offers up anything extra worth watching for. You know, I really hated Christopher Mintz-Plasse's "Evil" Ed, and compared to Chris Waller's version in the new movie, I'd kiss Mint-Plasse's feet. Not to mention the travesty that's become of a once iconic character, Peter Vincent...

The story, and character development are rushed. Now, couple that with the laughable, and or forgettable acting, and you see what a mess this film is. They tried to  go to new territories with making Gerri really be  Elizabeth Bathory, but it doesn't stick. It's not the right story, and it's not pulled off right. I think we're all overdue for a good horror film about Elisabeth Bathory. The 2006 flick, "Stay Alive" tried to make it happen, but much like this picture, didn't know how to properly execute a decent plot.

I'm overall very let down by this sequel/remake. There's nothing memorable about it, and quite frankly, I was happy when it ended. Other than some decent gore, there's nothing impressive offered. And the gore doesn't really mean anything with lazy makeup applications. I don't understand the point, purpose, or need for this film's existence. But, then again, it's not my place to say what films should and shouldn't get made. 

I can't say that if there's another installment in the "Fright Night" series that I'll be anxious to see it. Unless by some great power someone steps up to get the series back on track for a 3rd film, which I'm not holding my breath for. I actually would prefer the original "Fright Night: Part II" (1988), and I didn't even really like that one either!. "Fright Night 2: New Blood" is honestly just as bad as the "30 Days of Night" sequel. 

In the end, this motion picture goes into the bin of films this year that I'll never watch again. That about sums it up.

CURSE OF CHUCKY brings the series back with a vengeance

RATED- UNRATED

RUN TIME- 97 MINS

WRITER(S)- DON MANCINI

STARRING- DANIELLE BISUTTI, BRAD DOURIF, AND ALEX VINCENT

DIRECTOR- DON MANCINI

Synopsis taken from IMDb
After her mother's mysterious death, Nica begins to suspect that the talking, red-haired doll her visiting niece has been playing with may be the key to recent bloodshed and chaos. 

It's been 9 years since this beloved series has been touched, and although there was some hate going around when the first trailer for "Curse of Chucky" was released, I remained optimistic. I had a strong feeling since I first heard of this film that it was going to be good, and I was right. It's great to hear such good things being said about this movie now that some have seen it! I think it's a breath of relief for most of us, because so many horror movies have a way of not living up to their hype, or simply aren't deserving of it.

Don Mancini not only wrote, but also directed this latest installment. Although Mancini takes credit for writing all of the films in the "Child's Play" franchise, this one takes things back to the way they were originally, before the series took a slight stumble down hill. While I'll be the first to admit that I liked "Seed of Chucky", I'll also admit that it wasn't a strong point for the franchise to end on. So, not only is it good to see Chucky return in all his former glory, but also to see the series go back to its scary roots and be taken more seriously than the last two sequels.

"Curse of Chucky" goes back to the opening of the original film, with Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif) and, rewrites the timeline and history up until after "Child's Play 3". This not only provides us with a fresh story, but also ties in very well with the original three films, forgetting Bride and Seed ever happened. Nothing drastic is changed, just enough to allow things to go in a more idealistic way. I personally think that this is the film that this series needed, and brings it back to life with a great crimson vibrance! 

Brad Dourif takes up his mantel again as the voice of our favorite psychotic, murderous doll. Dourif also gets some screen time, playing a younger version of himself as Charles Lee Ray. These new scenes of him tie in directly with the new storyline for this motion picture. Brad's own daughter, Fiona Dourif is our lead lady in this film, Nica. A paraplegic who is tormented by the deadly, red-headed foe that is Chucky! As everyone around her starts to die, starting with her mother, all fingers eventually point to one suspect. 

Chucky still has his sense of personality, which is laced with some dark humor and dialogue but, it never goes too far on the comedy side. As a matter of fact, truth be told, the first 45 minutes are downright scary! For the first time in a long time, since probably the second film, I was actually creeped out! The malevolent feeling is back in the blood of this series, and I love it. I really like how Chucky is very in-your-face, and hands on. It really does cast him in his old light, the way we've wanted to see him for a while.

Not to mention the look of Chucky himself, which I've liked since I first saw the trailer. Despite some negative buzz going around about his new look, it holds up well. Going beyond that, the animatronics are very well done. I actually heard some people say that he "looks too real" based on what they saw in the trailers. And the thing is, they said it in a negative way. How that makes sense, I'll never know. 

If you ask me, the more real it looks, the better it is. People are inadvertently complimenting the hell out of this movie based on their own ignorance. Most of those who've gotten to see it already have changed their tune now.

The kills are top-notch! There's electrocution, as well as the good old trusty axe and knife used as heinous weapons in some creative, gory kills. And it's very suspenseful. The thrill of wondering who is going to die next and how, is back and what's not to love about that? There's also two cameos that I thoroughly enjoyed, but won't mention for the sake of spoiling it for others.

I'm not sure if the ending is intended for a sequel, or if it simply capped off the series and gave it the ending it deserved. That being said, I'd love to see another installment of this quality. And seeing as they're going strong, I'd highly suggest another sequel than an unnecessary reboot or remake. I'm just glad there's still a series out there that I follow that's not going the remake route, much like the "Scream" franchise is doing. So, I hope to see promise in the future, and I remain positive.  

I think in the end, I'd rank this as the third best film in the series of 6. Right after the original and Bride. I actually bounce back and forth between those two. It really depends on my mood, because they're extreme opposites due to the terror:humor ratio. "Curse of Chucky" rests right beside them, and above the others. 

And don't forget, stay tuned after the credits... 

I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE 2 holds nothing back

RATED- UNRATED
RUN TIME- 105 MINS
WRITER(S)- NEIL ELMAN AND THOMAS FENTON
STARRING- JEMMA DALLENDER, JOE ABSOLOM, AND YAVOR BAHAROV
DIRECTOR- STEVEN R. MONROE



Synopsis taken from IMDb
Katie is trying to make it in the cutthroat world of modeling. When she innocently accepts an offer to have new photos taken for her portfolio, the experience quickly turns into an unthinkable nightmare of rape, torture, and kidnapping. When a twist of fate finally frees her from her captors- beaten, battered, bruised, and broken, she will have to tap into the darkest places of the human psyche to not only survive her ordeal, but to ultimately find the strength to exact her brutal revenge.

  

Being a big fan of the 2010 remake, I was definitely excited about this sequel, especially since it's by the same director. However, I also remained a bit skeptical. There's concerns that rose to my mind, like little red lights flashing. Sadly, I must say that I was right in being apprehensive about this one. The alarm going off in my conscience, those flashing red lights ended up being dead on the money, and I'll tell you why.

I've said this before, and I'll repeat it again for the sake of this films topic. There is no such thing as a good rape scene. I understand that sometimes in order to make a revenge flick, or a drama even, rape needs to be depicted. However, there is tactful ways of doing it. The film that I praise for having a tactful rape scene is Alex Aja's 2006 "The Hills Have Eyes" remake. It didn't show you much but, you were fully aware of what was going on.

The 2010 remake of "I Spit On Your Grave" also surprised me in the sense that although it was extreme, it wasn't overdone. The amount of maltreatment was done quite well. There wasn't too much thrusting or humping shown. It was more implied that she was molested by the gang of guys due to her passing out. I think that's the greatest thing about the retelling of the 1978 motion picture. The brutality was shown on such a tense level, that it wasn't necessary to exploit every little thing. It was immensely intense as well. And, the payoff was as much deserved as it was worth the wait.

This sequel does the exact opposite of what I praise the remake for. Before I go further, let me go on record as saying that I did like this movie. I just found it to be less tasteful than the prior installment, and not as thrilling. Unfortunately, the thing that I think lessened this one compared to the other, is the revenge. And that's a big problem.

This film centers around Katie (Jemma Dallender) and the gang of foreign creeps she encounters, from Bulgaria. When she refuses to go nude for the photo shoot, she soon realizes that she got mixed up with the wrong people. Things go from bad to worse, and then a little more worse. And right when you think the film has gone a bit too far, it goes a bit further. This to me, is like a half-sister to the remake. It's got similar traits, and is definitely part of the same family but, it's not as complete and whole.

After being beaten and raped repeatedly by multiple men, and being deceived by someone Katie thought she could trust, as well as the police, the payback just isn't what it needed to be for such a violent and gritty piece of cinema. The rape and torture goes a bit too far, to the point where it's almost un-watchable. They show a lot more than they should, unlike the remake. It's really not a necessity to show all that is shown, it's a bit much, and crosses a few lines, especially for a lackluster conclusion. Katie is beaten horribly, raped multiple times by different men, shocked, and pissed on. Oh, and buried alive! 

The revenge scenes were nasty and twisted, and deserving. They're not anything but shock factor though. It seems so fabricated and commercial, it doesn't feel as real or dreadful like it should. The final death is really hard to watch for men, at least I found it painful to view. Brings a new image to mind when hearing the term balls in a vice.

And, there's one other big thing that I did not like, and that is that they made Katie too much of a female icon almost, for lack of a better word. Once she decides to go over to the dark side, and get vengeance  for herself, she gets this black leather jacket, and she wears it through the remainder of the movie. I don't like that she has a cool, dark image about her. She should have a dirty tank top with sweat stains and grease and soot on it. She just doesn't look the part, and the wardrobe throws me off. It just lost the genuine revenge feel that the other film had, and you can see that this one has the brain of the remake but, not the heart or soul.

There's a scene where she exacts revenge on a big bull of a man. She knocks him out, and drags him through the train station tunnels where she's living, picks him up and puts him on a bed, all while wearing her little black jacket and without breaking a sweat. I'm not one for nitpicking, but damn. As I said above, this was just far too fabricated and insincere. 

Do I hate this film? No. Do I love it? No. Do I like it? Yes. 

I just can't fully back it because it's hard to watch something so gut-wrenching and have the pigs responsible for these despicable acts get punished in a watered down way. This film had no problem screwing with male genitalia but, what it needed to grow a bigger set of nuts for the sickness depicted and turn it up a notch. You can't have the antagonists do worse than the protagonist or the point is missed, and that's the case with this sequel.

Would I watch it again? Yeah. Would I buy it? Yeah. Will I watch it often? No. 

The remake is already hard enough to watch, and I like it a lot more than this one. "I Spit on your Grave 2" is Jack Ketchum's "The Girl Next Door", meets Eli Roth's "Hostel". I'm more disappointed than anything with this one. I wish they'd gone more original than predictable. Oh well. 

On a final note, the acting is good. But like the gore and torture aspect of this movie, it takes you out of the experience because it seems so expected and refurbished.

COFFIN BABY lacks everything but gore

RATED- UNRATED
RUN TIME- 95 MINS
WRITER(S)- JOSH EDWARDS AND DEAN JONES
STARRING- BRUCE DERN, BRIAN KRAUSE AND ETHAN PHILIPS



Synopsis taken from IMDb
Hollywood, California is turned upside down by a series of strange and horrific murders creating chaos and turmoil in tinsel town. One particular victim is kidnapped, held captive and subjected to witness the torture and murder of numerous other victims. It is by her will, strength, and faith that she must survive the ordeal. Her escape seems hopeless and only worsens when outside supernatural forces become more difficult to contend with than her captor. 

   

This film was brought to my attention by a fellow horror nut, who told me I should check it out. And me, being someone who will give anything a chance, went and watched it. Sadly, I don't have the positive remarks to place on this movie that he did when suggesting it to me. As a matter of fact, I didn't really feel anything but disappointment. I really felt like this picture had a chance to go somewhere and do things, and it didn't.

What's funny about this film is that it's the sequel to Tobe Hooper's 2004 remake of the 1978 film of the same title "The Toolbox Murders", which is about a masked killer murdering people in a hotel undergoing renovations  So, what I'm wondering is, where is all of the publicity for this film? Even though I was never a fan of either the original or remake, I know of a lot of people who are. I guess the filmmakers felt as obliged to make a sequel as it was necessary, so there's an over abundance of laziness when it comes to this film, which includes but isn't limited to the acting and script. This is another scenario of someone(s) making a motion picture just for the sake of making it, hoping to make some dough off of it. 

Honestly, I don't even know the lead character's name. I'm not even sure they say it in the film, and if they do, clearly it isn't stated enough. How can you feel attached to a character when you don't even know their name? There was no story to the characters other than being tortured and watching others get tortured. The filmmakers promised a lot of gore, and they delivered with some brutal and disgusting scenes. But, what's left after the gore and guts settle is absolutely nothing. 

Yet again, here's a film that tries to get it's name out there and known for gore as opposed to being known for a good film. Using gore as a focal point almost always automatically fails for films, and this isn't an exception. Watching a girl cry and whine for the entire length of the movie for some blood and gore, isn't worth it for me. Give me characters, give me story. This movie has neither.

I'd like to credit this film for not only having nothing to offer but gross gore effects, but for having absolutely no creativity whatsoever, not even the gory kills are new or inventive. Everything that is done, has been done better, so the whole selling point of this film automatically drops this one down a few notches. It doesn't have a leg to stand on. 

As I mentioned above, the acting is so poor, there's no heart to this movie. It's my belief that this film was just a payday to the filmmakers and crew. You'd have thought that with Tobe Hooper as director of the previous film that they'd step it up a bit. That's not the case. If you don't put effort into your movie, how can you expect positive responses? You can't just hope it does well and half-ass everything. Making a good movie requires hard work, and it really shows how little work and thought process went into this one.

If I didn't know better, I'd say that the crew watched "Captivity", "Amusement","Hostel", and "Friday the 13th", and just picked out parts they liked and imitated them. This is just not acceptable for a film that should have delivered to the fans! Like I said, I'm not even a fan of the original or remake, and I'm saying this could be better. That's pretty sad if you think about it. 

It would be a lot easier for me to keep listing off things that I didn't like about "Coffin Baby", than it would for me to say what I do like about it, in which there's really nothing. Honestly, I actually had to stop this movie half way through because I was so tired. I didn't realize until the next day when I went to finish it that it's the film that was putting me to sleep. Very dry, very boring. Some part of me can see why some people would enjoy it, it's just not for me. This is the 2nd review I've done in a row on films that I'll never watch again.

V/H/S/2 is worth rewinding and watching again

If you follow my blog, or read often, you know that I love horror anthologies. In all honesty though, I don't think there's a horror fan alive who don't like anthology films. 'V/H/S/2 is the follow-up to the cult smash hit 'V/H/S', which hit last year. Being a big fan and supporter of the first film, I was more than ready to experience the next chapter in this series. Just like the first film, this one has a nice set-up of directors of all variety. Offering us new stories, and new points of view, there's something for every kind of horror fan in this sequel.

I watched the film for the first time with some friends last night. I woke up this morning and gave it a 2nd viewing before my review, allowing me to let it soak in some more in my head. I was pleased with this movie, it's good stuff. But, it's not like the first film. They don't have the same feel to them. The first came off like a snuff film; very gritty and haunting. 

This sequel, comes off as a lot more fun and not as serious. There's some good stuff in this movie though, a ton of creativity and heart. 'V/H/S/2' is a really good installment in what may become the best new horror series out there right now.



"Tape 49"
Director- Simon Barrett
Writer- Simon Barrett

This is the story that was the glue holding the other stories together. It's the one the film starts with, and we go back to it in between viewing the VHS tapes. It's the current story, and it follows two private investigators who are looking for a missing college student. They break into his house to look for clues or,  anything that may lead to where he is. They find blood on one of the walls, and a setup of several TVs and an unlimited amount of VHS tapes. The male investigator leaves the female investigator, Ayesha, to watch the cassettes while he roams the house looking for clues.

Much like the first film, you get angles of the viewer, in this film it's Ayesha, watching the tapes with her back turned to the rest of the house. We, the viewers, see weird things going on in the background that she doesn't notice. Adding that touch of suspense. As the other stories are told and allow this one to unfold piece by piece, it still leaves you with questions. But it's a good, well-told story that is sinister, and fun.  3.5/5

"Phase I Clinical Trials"
Director- Adam Wingard
Writer-  Simon Barrett

As a small price for getting his eyesight back, a man agrees to let his life be watched through his new government implanted eye, as part of a test trial. He's warned that there may be glitches, but what he ends up experiencing is much, much more grim. He starts seeing ghosts in his house, more specifically, a little girl, who tends to sleep under the covers of his bed. I thought it was really creepy seeing the small child outline under the comforter. I know that I for one, would have crapped my pants, and hightailed it the hell out of there.

Then a girl incorporates herself into the mix, claiming she knows about what's going on and why our lead is seeing weird things. It hits you abruptly and doesn't let up. The last five minutes of this story are extremely suspenseful. It gets pretty bloody too, which is always a nice touch. Overall, I wasn't overly happy with this story, but I did like it. I just didn't do anything really new for me. 2/5

"A Ride in the Park"
Director- Gregg Hale and Eduardo Sánchez
Writer- Jamie Nash and Eduardo Sánchez 

 This film revolves around a male biker who's out for an early morning run to get his heart pumping. His camera is mounted on his helmet, so everything you see is from the top of his head. I liked that idea, it was different from just seeing through the characters eyes. His trail ride is interrupted when a woman stops him for help, and begins regurgitating projectile blood-vomit. She then bites our main character and the film progresses from his POV as he turns into a zombie.

The zombies in this movie are actually pretty decent. In a world where the zombie realm is overplayed and overused, it's nice to see some new and creative life be breathed into the rising dead. These zombies are actually intelligent, which makes them fierce! You can actually tell how and what they're feeling through the noises, grunts and groans that they make. They're fast, fierce, and brutal. It ends with a bang, and has some humor to it, very entertaining. 3/5  

"Safe Haven"
Director- Timo Tjahjanto
Writer- Timo Tjahjanto

This is the 2nd to best one in the whole damn movie. This one hits hard, with a dark and twisted-but desirous  story. A film crew goes to Indonesia to do a report on a cult going on. A man, "The Father", of the cult sleeps with children to purify them. He leads a large commune of people who believe in his ideology, that they're on their way to a higher plane of existence. 

Things get out of control suddenly and fast. You're thrown into the middle of some sick, ritualistic things that start hammering you with jitters and puzzlement. It's intense and nail biting. The ending gets silly though, and loses that firm grip of fear it built up. Overall it's a damn good story, but it would have been a lot better if the ending had some solidity to it. 3.5/5

"Slumber Party Alien Abduction"
Director- Jason Eisener
Writer- Jason Eisener 

 This is by far my favorite of the bunch this time around. This is the scariest, and most suspenseful out of all of the stories shown. The camera is first hand POV for the first half, the last half has the camera mounted on the family dog.  Finally, a really well done, scary alien movie. The fact this this is a short film actually helps the integrity of it. It keeps things short and sweet, causing you to sort through the mayhem of what's going on. A group of youngsters, young and older, undergo an alien invasion during a slumber party.

The cherry on top was how genuine the characters came off. The children acting like imbeciles gave it that sense of realism it needed for this story to be pulled off. The extraterrestrials are eerie as hell looking! They fit the perfect description of what you expect of "Greys".  Bloody well done. 4.5/5

 'V/H/S/2' is that new amusement ride going on in the horror genre that everyone's going to have to try. It's a really good, well handled film. And a big compliment to it's predecessor. Great anthology movie, and I hope there's more to come. At this quality, I'd say I'd be down for at least 5 of these films. It's not a perfect horror film, but it gets a lot right.

THIS FILM GETS 3 1/2 REAPER SKULLS OUT OF 5

DAY 8: Hellraiser: Revelations (2011)

RATED- R

RUN TIME- 75 MINS

WRITER(S)- GARY J. TUNNICLIFFE

STARRING-STEVEN BRAND, FRED TATASCIORE AND NICK EVERSMAN

DIRECTOR- VICTOR GARCIA

Synopsis taken form IMDb

In this ninth installment of the Hellraiser franchise, two friends discover a puzzle box in Mexico, which opens a gateway to Hell. Before long, dermatological nightmare Pinhead has returned to make the lives of everyone in his miserable way.

I'm going to put it this way. It's the simplest way I can really phrase it that'll sum it up properly. This series is a really, really old dog and it's had it's day and it's claim to fame. This film takes that weak, depleted dog and walks him around to the back of the barn and pulls the trigger, putting the dog out of it's misery. Only this dog died very undignified and in a miserable way. Not to offend any animal lovers out there, I'm not trying to say it's okay to kill old dogs, I'm just saying that I'm glad this figurative was put out of it's misery.

The new replacement Pinhead (Stephan Smith Collins) is just bad. I haven't done any reading on the topic but I'm really curious as of why Doug Bradley didn't play the part. I would like to know if it was a decision out of his hands and the studio gave it to someone else to try freshen up the series, or if he just saw the script and threw it in the trash can and walked away. Part of me hopes that he did something close to the latter, but  after the last few films, something tells me it was just out of his hands. Clearly he didn't care how good the movies were or he'd have bailed out by this point. Either way, it was a horrific performance and really just worthy of shaking your head in distaste.

It was cool to see Chatterer back, I was glad that they thew him in there. He was the only thing about this film that holds on to the old films. Everything else is so new and poorly done. They made a movie that looks like it was done on my camcorder. It's freaking porn quality, not even the lighting was right. It is an amateur attempt at making a sequel. Hell, this makes all the sequels look like "The Godfather" in comparison. This is one of those movies that I will truly never watch again. I'd give it away if I won an autographed copy.

The story was so repetitive and I swear you could have hired a 15 year old with an imagination to write it. No creativity went into this film. No likable characters, no character development, poor gore, bad effects, bad makeup and no originality. I'm really glad that this is the last one I'm subjected to watch because after this I don't think I could bring myself to be even remotely interested in this series anymore. 

The acting in this film is appallingly bad. I can't believe that the series has sunken this low, to have film that doesn't hold up in any way. And to think I laughed at how the guy from the Allstate Insurance commercials was in a previous film. Atleast he's an actor and not some kid with no or next to no experience as an actor. The apple has fallen far from the tree...

The script is so bad I didn't care about a damn thing in this movie. I laughed it off and impatiently waited for it to be over. Not a scare or an impressive mark about it. It's incredibly bad. I imagine that the crew all met in production and came to the decision to make the worst movie they can make. Thank God I'm finished with this series. Thanks to all my followers who read these reviews. Hopefully some time will pass and people will come across these reviews on my site and view them and respect the heart ache I put myself through (laugh).

I'll be back tomorrow with something new!

  

THIS FILM GETS 1/2 OF A REAPER SKULL OUT OF 5

DAY 7: Hellraiser: Hellworld (Video 2005)

"The Newest. Most Horrific Tale."

RATED- R

RUN TIME- 91 MINS

WRITER(S)- JOEL SOISSON AND CARL V. DUPRE

STARRING- LANCE HENRIKSEN, KATHERYN WINNICK AND CHRISTOPHER JACOT

DIRECTOR- RICK BOTA

Synopsis taken from IMDb

Gamers playing a MMORPG based on the "Hellraiser" franchise find their lives endangered after being invited to a rave whose host intends to show them the truth behind the Cenobite mythos.

Be forewarned that if you don't want to read another rant about an awful Hellraiser sequel, don't bother reading this. Right when I thought the series might have gotten back on track with Deader, they come back with this piece of garbage. This was the most disappointing one yet because not only was it lame, it tried to change key things about the legacy. Yeah, it's all explained away in the end, but it's still ridiculous. This is yet again, another one that doesn't feel like a Hellraiser sequel.

I actually really like Lance Henriksen even though he's been in some bad movies. This though, is a low point and I'm sure he tries not to remember this one. The acting is awful right from the go (except Henriksen) and the story already seemed to be dull. It was one of those films where you know going in that most of the characters are douche bags and you hope they die painfully at the likes of Pinhead. You're not supposed to root for Pinhead! He's supposed to be a force, an imposing entity and instead they dull it down with no likeable characters and no character development.

The funniest thing to me is how all of the characters refer to the original "Hellraiser" as old and outdated. There's several things said about this, trying to imply that this is a much better and scarier movie than the original. Making you think that they beefed things up a bit, but they don't. The fact that they tried to outdo the original is a joke and this film fails miserably in almost all aspects. Some cocky film makers and writers trying to rewrite the past with a straight to video sequel. Yeah, they're weren't delusional with that were they?

The worst thing about this film is that they make Pinhead a damn slasher! Rather than other forces and chains ripping these half wits to shreds, he actually hacks them up himself. He cuts Derrick's head off with a meat cleaver. This shot really turned me off of this movie. Now they truly have lost vision of what Hellraiser is and was. Trying to humanize Pinhead doesn't work, let him be a demon and a supernatural force. 

But this is a far superior portrayal of Pinhead compared to the original film, don't ya know?

Yeah, it gets dismissed at the end as being hallucinations from a psychedelic drug they were given in a revenge scheme. Poor cop-out for a poor movie. If this were a movie on it's own and not a Hellraiser film I may have liked it. But this IS Hellraiser, and they told a really bad and uninventive story with this one. Sometimes trying new things strays way to far from the original ideal and this film suffers horribly. I don't consider this a Hellraiser film. 

Overall, it's a cheap, lousy, half-assed attempt at being even close to a good imitation of a Hellraiser entry. I couldn't be more happy that I'm done with all of this after tomorrow's review. Which won't be pretty either, I promise.

THIS FILM GETS 1 REAPER SKULL OUT OF 5