Deep Red a.k.a. Profondo Rosso a.k.a. Mondo Bizarro…

You know when you watch something that you know is supposed to be a cinematic masterpiece, but no matter how hard you try, you just can’t seem to subscribe to that view yourself? Well I had that feeling when I sat down to watch Deep Red (Profondo Rosso) recently.

Now I know that Dario Argento is a skillful film maker, and a master of his craft. I have watched many of Argento’s other films, and enjoyed them thoroughly. I had however not seen what had been described to me as Argento’s best film, Deep Red.

What's this...

Let me start with what I felt were the film’s good points. Firstly, the cinematography for the most part was quite stylish. The plot was much more straightforward and generally coherent than some of Argento’s other works (this is not necessarily a “good” point, just a “point” actually), and two or three scenes were genuinely pretty terrifying (the best being the scene when a freaky mannequin emerges from the dark!).

Now for the not-so-good. The film was half dubbed in English, and half left in the original Italian. I read that there was some reason for this (lost footage, different versions sliced together, or some shit), but really I don’t care why. The dubbing meant that I felt completely removed from the experience of this film. The immersion that I would usually feel was non-existent. I understand that having a film in English probably helps it to be sold overseas, but I hate it. What’s wrong with having subtitles? If someone finds it too hard to read and watch at the same time, then skip the film and do something less mentally challenging, like eating sand. And thanks to all the (really badly performed) dubbing, the characters seemed really overblown, like caricatures, and again this really detracted from the experience.

Chucky's dad...

Secondly, the score was irritating. The spooky children’s song that played prior to each murder was ok (although the excuse for why the killer played it before each murder was unconvincing), but this was followed by outrageously inappropriate Italian 80′s synth pop which totally killed the mood of the scene.

Thirdly, the entire middle part of the film was pretty boring, with a whole lot of nothing going on (well the protagonists were investigating the murders but I kind of zoned out). For a film that had a really great first ten minutes, this was disappointing. The climax of the film was again pretty good, but it was too little too late.

If you’re a horror fan then this film is probably worth a look, simply because it’s Argento. If not, and you want to see an Argento film, check out Suspiria, Phenomena, or Tenebrae instead.

Agree? Disagree? Let me know what you think…

CS.

The one and only… Halloween…

I had a lot of difficulty deciding whether to review this film, as it’s been reviewed a thousand times by a thousand other people who probably know a lot more about horror cinema than me, and who write about it a hell of a lot better too.

But I eventually decided that I can’t leave out what is, in my humble opinion, one of the best movies ever made. What I will do however is keep my review short, and just list why I love Halloween so much:

Groundbreaking- Halloween was the first highly successful slasher film, and provided a template for horror films that would be imitated right to this day.

Score- The simple and horrifying music still gives me chills.

Go Laurie!

Story- Awesome storyline, just like a modern fairytale, a simple scary tale that has gone on to foster urban legends everywhere.

The Shape- Again, often imitated, but never equalled for true terror.

Longevity- Still holds up as a great and scary film, after more than 30 years.

Finally, Halloween is just freaking awesome… If you haven’t seen it, shame on you, and if you haven’t seen it for a while, then get it out, dust it off and enjoy the ride…

CS.

Freddy’s Revenge a.k.a Am I reading too much into this…?

As a citizen of this fair town of Springwood, I have to admit I’ve been quite remiss of late, and have been neglectful in keeping up with our good friend Frederick C. Krueger. As a result, I recently decided to sit down and re-watch ‘A Nightmare On Elm Street Two: Freddy’s Revenge’. Now, it’s probably been a good few years since I last watched the second installment in the Nightmare series, and while I could remember the general gist of the film, and a few stand out scenes (the glorious exploding parrot scene amongst them), much of the plot had been largely forgotten by yours truly.

So it was a genuine surprise to sit down and watch a film that had better acting, a better storyline, and was overall, simply much better than I remembered. For a plot overview, check out IMDB or wikipedia. Probably because of the reputation that the subsequent Nightmare films have garnered over the years, I had prepared myself to laugh my way through this film, and instead found that, while having a few LOL moment (see the aforementioned ‘parrot scene’..!) it actually had an unexpectedly inventive take on the Freddy story.

"What's happening to me?!"

Basically Freddy is trying to return to the waking world via the body of Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton), whose family has recently moved into the home of previous tenant Nancy Thompson, of the 1st Nightmare film. Freddy begins to take over Jesse’s body, and through Jesse commits a series of murders in the real world, as opposed to only killing his victims in their sleep.

Now, while I did say the film was better than I expected, this should not be interpreted as a glowing endorsement. Better doesn’t necessarily equal good, especially when my expectations couldn’t have been much lower. The acting is occasionally stiff, the script is often less than good, and some scenes just don’t quite convince. That said, ‘Freddy’s Revenge’ is actually a quite enjoyable film that’s has the charm of one of those ‘not great but ok’ 80s films, that on a repeat viewing aren’t really as bad as expected.

However one thing struck me as I watched this film, leading me to the question in the title of this post. If you have recently seen the film, you probably know what I’m referring to. Is it just me, or does this film have a none too subtle gay subtext? Or, as I have already asked, am I reading too much into this?

Firstly, we see Jesse wake from a nightmare and head straight to what is clearly a gay leather bar, where he encounters his gym coach, who, being in a leather bar, is appropriately dressed in a studded leather vest. Suddenly we are at the gym, where the coach has Jess running laps of the basketball court. Ok, fair enough. Then the coach sends Jesse to the showers, while the coach is suddenly assaulted by flying balls in the storeroom (I was going to make a joke about the balls, but I won’t…). Coach is then dragged to the showers, strung up, stripped, whipped with a towel on the bottom, then finally killed by Jesse/Freddy. I have to say I watched this with jaw agape, wondering how it could be that I don’t remember THIS scene, or questioned just what the hell was going on.

Subtext anyone...?

From this scene on, all I could see was what I could only interpret as Jesse’s struggle with his burgeoning homosexuality, as he tried in vain to keep Freddy/sexuality repressed. The high point comes when Jesse and his female friend Lisa (Kim Myers) are about to consummate their relationship, and Freddy begins to rear his head. Jesse runs away to his (male and attractive) friend Grady’s bedroom, where he tells Grady about Freddy (a.k.a. homosexual feelings) rising up inside him. Freddy eventually splits Jesse in two, and emerges to kill Grady in the bedroom.

In conclusion, I have to say I don’t think there is anything necessarily funny about a sexual subtext, gay or straight. What is the most hilarious part of all this is that director Jack Sholder apparently claims the subtext is unintentional. My god, I ask you, HOW? Check it out and let me know your thoughts…

Until then,

CS.

New post, first post…

Having been a closet horror film fanatic for many years I have finally decided to out myself. I love modern horror films (Wolf Creek, Drag Me To Hell), old horror films (Halloween, The Omen), very old horror films (Dracula, House of Wax), popular horror films (A Nightmare On Elm Street), obscure horror films (Count Yorga, Razorback) and the just plain bad horror films (not much beats Goblins II for awesome awfulness).

Thusly I have decided to share my opinion (for what it’s worth..) about the good, the bad and the in-between horror films I have seen over the years, and hopefully have others provide me with their views on this topic so close to my heart.

It is an exciting and sometimes controversial time for horror film fans. Classics have been or are being remade, or *cough* re-imagined (Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween I and II, Friday the 13th, Prom Night, Last House On The Left), originals are being given the Hollywood treatment (Let The Right One In, any moderately successful Japanese/Korean etc etc horror film), and amongst all the flotsam and jetsam, new, challenging, inspired horror films are being created.

My reason for beginning this exposition is my recent viewing of Sam Raimi’s return to form in ‘Drag Me To Hell’, starring Alison Lohman, Justin Long and Lorna Raver. If you are bothering to read this, I assume you have seen the film, or are intending to, and I will therefore bypass providing you a detailed plot outline (see IMDB or wikipedia for that…), and go straight for the jugular a.k.a. my review.

One scary mother...

‘Drag Me To Hell’ is a pleasure of a horror film for the simple reason that it is a straight-forward supernatural horror, devoid of distractions and absurdly contrived plot lines that can (and have) ruined many promising recent efforts in the horror genre. In this film, Lohman’s character is cursed by a gypsy, and will be dragged to Hell by a demon (the Lamia) in three days. It’s nice and uncomplicated, and who doesn’t love a good demon story. ‘DMTH’ is a tight, entertaining and at times horrifying film, that, while not groundbreaking, is a delighful return to a simple style of horror reminiscent of classics such as Raimi’s own ‘Evil Dead’.

Lohman’s performance as Christine Brown is wonderful and sympathetic, and she perfectly portrays a woman realising the unbelievable- that she is cursed and going to Hell (it helps that not only is Lohman a solid actor, but is also beautiful in a ‘real person’ way, not a Hollwood ‘my kneecaps are the only original part of me’ way). Raimi had originally wanted Lohman to play Christine in a much more unsympathetic light than Lohman eventually did, and I have to say I’m glad Lohman went with her instincts- granted, her character does a shitty thing- but does it really warrant being condemned to Hell for eternity? Long is out of type but well cast as Christine’s confused but ever supportive boyfriend, and Raver is wonderfully vile and terrifying as Sylvia.

There are also signs of Raimi’s off-beat sense of humour, which, unlike in, say, Army of Darkness, does not distract from the unfolding horror of Christine’s plight (*Disclaimer* That comment should not be interpreted as a slight against AoD, which I sincerely LOVE. I do however find the film occasionally more humourous than frightening). It also must be said that the film is fairly light on gore and blood (though heavy on ‘gross out’, look for the maggots scene, awesome!), but as with other good horror films, sometimes the real terror is in anticipation of what we don’t or can’t see.

To conclude, ‘DMTH’ is a truly fun, frightening 99 minutes that has restored my faith that, when the elements come together, great horror films are still being made.

If you enjoyed my review (or even if you didn’t, I’m always open to other points of view!) feel free to make a comment. If you too share a love for all things horror, drop me a line, let me know what films I need to see, need to avoid, etc…

Until next time…

CS.