GhoulieJoe

‘St. John’s Wort’: It’s the Cure for What Ails You

Japanese movie, AKA Otogiriso. Nami (Megumi Okina), a video game designer, has just inherited a mansion from her late father, whom she never knew. Wanting to check out her new place (and get some game ideas), she and her ex-boyfriend/fellow designer Kohei (Yôichirô Saitô) head over there. What they don’t know is that the house is haunted, and there’s a reason Nami didn’t know her father.

It’s low-budget, but the special effects aren’t bad. Actually it looks a lot like a video game. When Nami and Kohei drive to the house, the main camera angle used is a point of view shot, similar to a driving game. The colors of the scenery are over-bright and arbitrary, and look computer-generated. Then there’s the meeting with the caretaker, which is definitely like a video game; he’s not shown as a person, but as an animated icon with a dialogue box.

I think it’s a clever movie, but also a bit slow. A lot of time is spent on Nami and Kohei roaming the house and not finding anything particularly interesting. It can also be confusing. But it’s creepy too, and pretty original. One of my favorite things about the movie is that (unusual for the thirty or so Asian horror movies I’ve seen) there is a romantic subplot, but it’s wonderfully subtle and painless.

A word about subtitles vs. dubbing: the first time I saw the film, it was subtitled. The second time I saw it, it was dubbed, with no option for subtitles on the DVD menu. I prefer subtitles myself; I don’t like the translation to be even more Americaned-up for me. For example: [an object flies across the room suddenly] Subbed Kohei: “That was a surprise!” Dubbed Kohei: “Oh, that scared me!” Subbed or dubbed, check it out if you’re in the mood for something beautifully shot and creative.

‘Spider Baby’: Mid-’60s Grindhouse

The Merrye family is exhibiting some odd behavior—the Merrye Syndrome, which is an age regression so far back it goes prenatal, at least psychologically, which apparently leads to “savagery and cannibalism.” The last of the bunch are teenagers Virginia (Jill Banner) and Elizabeth (Beverly Washburn) and their older brother Ralph (Sid Haig). They haven’t yet achieved the level of backwardness of their Uncle Ned and Aunt Clara (who live in the basement, eat corpses, and look like they’re in the Broadway show Cats); the girls are childish, wearing baby doll dresses and bows in their hair, while Ralph is more like a baby—he sucks his thumb and doesn’t speak. They’re taken care of by their kindly chauffeur Bruno (Lon Chaney Jr.), who made a promise to their late father that he wouldn’t let anything happen to them. Their idyllic lives are disrupted by money-grubbing Aunt Emily (Carol Ohmart) and her lawyer Schlocker (Carl Schanzer). She, along with her friendly brother Peter (Quinn K. Redeker), plan to take custody of the kids and the family fortune. However, the children want to stay where they are, and aren’t afraid of a little murder—in fact, they rather like it.

The opening credits of the film, with its goofy cartoons and theme song (sung by Chaney) belies the violence to follow. I was shocked multiple times, even on my second viewing. I had no idea that in 1967 a movie could be released that involves incest and cannibalism. There’s a scene when the Merryes serve up a cat for dinner, pretending it’s rabbit. It’s also ahead of its time in horror movie clichés. There’s a Black guy who dies first, and then there’s a woman in lingerie and high heels running around in the woods.

spi4 — Awww an established horror icon and an itty bitty Sid Haig

In between shocks I appreciated the acting. Haig is adorable, Jill Banner as Virginia is very creepy, and Chaney is at his least whiny. Despite the serious subject matter, there is quite a bit of humor, my favorite being Schlocker’s lawyer-talk as he’s being attacked: “There are proper procedures…” I wouldn’t call it by its alternate title, “The Maddest Story Ever Told,” but it is indeed pretty off-kilter. Check it out if you’re in the mood for something wacky and unpredictable.

‘Soul Survivors’: Creepy, but Not in a Good Way

Cassie (Melissa Sagemiller) is a college student plagued by the ghost of her dead boyfriend Sean (Casey Affleck), whom she accidentally killed in a car accident. She also continuously hallucinates two guys in masks who keep trying to kill her—and occasionally succeed. Her friends Matt (Wes Bentley) and Annie (Eliza Dushku) don’t believe her, but then again they may also be involved.

The film’s primary scare tactics revolve around the guys in the masks and Cassie’s hallucinations, which become repetitive very quickly. It feels like they’re always chasing her, and she’s constantly waking up from crazy dreams, leaving me not caring what’s actually happening.

soul4 — Wes Bentley always has an intense stare, but in this movie it’s just outlandish

The creepiest aspect of the movie for me is Matt and his obsession with Cassie. They used to date, and he’s wont to say things like, “I just wanna see you in a bathing suit again.” None of the characters is extremely likable, so I spent much of the movie waiting for it to reach its predictable conclusion. Actually, I spent quite a while waiting for a scene I remembered from my first viewing, when Cassie and Annie cover each other with paint and make out in the shower, but I’m either delusional or I watched some kind of director’s cut, because that scene didn’t happen.

I normally enjoy Luke Wilson, but his stint here as a priest doesn’t work for me. Nor does Angela Featherstone as Raven, Annie’s sort-of girlfriend, who’s pretty much pointless aside from being a reason to show girl-girl snogging. Said snogging is the only bright point of the movie for me, as I want to squish everyone’s face.

soul3 — The scariest thing about Raven is the filmmakers said, “Yup, this is a lesbian.”

Normally, a film has some redeeming factor for me, whether it’s an actor I like, a funny or scary moment, or a good quote. But with Soul Survivors, I got nothing. It’s not terribly original. The acting is unimpressive. I guess give it a look if you want something that’s not an utter pile of shit?

‘Something Wicked This Way Comes’: Made by Disney, So Naturally, it’s Terrifying

Young kids Will (Vidal Peterson) and Jim (Shawn Carson) are always looking for an adventure. They get more than they bargained for when an evil circus rolls into town. As they do. Proprietor Mr. Dark (Jonathan Pryce) grants wishes, but in a monkey’s paw-type way, for example giving an elderly school teacher the chance to be young again, and then making her blind. The boys are singled out after learning the carnival’s awful secret, and are subsequently hunted by Dark and his minions.

some3 — Pam Grier is awesome as the Dust Witch

Made by Walt Disney Productions, it’s meant to be a kid’s movie—it’s rated PG. But naturally for Disney, which operates on the blood of fictional dead parents and antagonists falling to their doom, there are un-kid-appropriate segments. For example a wannabe lady’s man cavorting shirtless with a troupe of belly dancers, and a villain getting stabbed in the gut with a lightning rod. There’s also a rather creepy scene when Will dreams his room is full of tarantulas.

some2 — This is disconcerting for multiple reasons

However, it’s also meant to be thought-provoking. There’s the dichotomy of good and evil, embodied by Will and Jim, and the massive amounts of character development rather than action. The film can be a bit slow (but not boring) and is very dialogue-driven. The children’s lines in particular can sound a bit unnatural, for example Will’s exclamation of “Why, that’s tomorrow!” It was made in 1983, but the book it’s based on was published twenty years earlier. So there’s an overwhelmingly golly-gee feel to it at times, with sap like, “Even now, on those special autumn days, when the air smells like smoke and the twilights are orange and ash gray, my mind goes back to Green Town, the place where I grew up.”

some5 — I’ll give you three guesses as to which is the “good” kid and which is the “bad” kid

Overall, it’s schmaltzy but scary. That’s just a darn good premise, I’m always down for movies about wishes that backfire in horrible and ironic ways. Give it a look if you’re in the mood for crisp autumn mornings and the promise of adventure just around the corner and the smell of…I dunno, pie? Just kidding, give it a look if you’re in the mood for nostalgia and pervy circus dudes.

‘Sleeping with the Enemy’: Still a Good Solid (Creepy) Movie

Laura (Julia Roberts) is married to Martin (Patrick Bergin), a batterer. She knows if she runs away he’ll find her, so she fakes her own death by pretending to drown and starts a new life in a small town far away. Her next-door neighbor Ben (Kevin Anderson) helps her learn to trust and love safely, and things are just about perfect. Until Martin finds out she’s alive and tracks her down.

One of my favorite scenes–Laura and Ben goofing around

I’m not a huge Julia Roberts fan, but she gives a good performance. I like how in the scenes with Martin she shows how Laura wears a mask for him—smiling when he’s looking at her and angry when he’s not paying attention. Roberts’s hair also does a good job—it symbolizes Laura’s mindset. When Laura’s with Martin it’s flat and reined in, usually over her shoulder. It’s really long and looks like a pain in the ass to take care of. Then the night she leaves him she cuts it. A few scenes later it’s wild and curly, and even when she has it tied back, it looks free.

Before:

After:

At its heart, the movie is about Laura’s search for freedom and agency. In addition to the beatings, Martin is a control freak, dictating how Laura keeps the house, what she cooks, whether she works, and even what she wears. She’s the clichéd housewife; when she’s not doing domestic chores, she’s arranging flowers. Laura escapes him and gets her own house, where she’s free to be a little messy and love a guy who’s kind and sensitive and makes pot roasts and has one of the least threatening jobs ever: drama teacher. In their relationship they’re well-matched, but Laura is also powerful. When Martin shows up, Ben does little besides get beaten up. Laura saves herself.

sleeping3 — “Take that, male oppressor! I got a tool of the patriarchy now!”

The movie is extremely predictable, but not without tension, for example when Laura suspects Martin’s in the house and searches for signs of his prissy towel hanging; she at first finds nothing, then suddenly her cupboard is rearranged. One scary scene is when Laura’s blind mother is knitting, and drops her needle. She feels around for it, and we see Martin’s shoe. He’s been standing over her without her (or us) knowing he’s there, and he has this horrible intense look of hatred on his face.

sleeping7 — This isn’t the exact scene, but you get the picture

Overall the dialogue is decent and there are no major plot holes. Check it out if you want something creepy without sleaze—you know, when a woman can take a bath without showing her boobs or getting hacked up.

‘Scream and Scream Again’: Confusing but Fun

U.K.-based American International film. Multiple storylines include: serial killings of young women, cop on the trail Superintendent Bellaver (Alfred Marks), officers Griffin (Julian Holloway) and Helen (Judy Bloom), forensic technician Dr. Sorel (Christopher Matthews), evil guys Konratz (Marshall Jones) and Dr. Browning (Vincent Price), and a jogger in hospital who’s slowly losing his limbs. Eventually they all sort of come together to reveal Browning’s plot to make synthetic people out of used body parts.

It’s early in the decade, but already the thumping bass and swelling trumpets of the ’70s are rampant. This one even has a theme song by The Amen Corner. But aside from the cheesy music, my main complaints are about the overly large cast (even wedging in Russian spies) and the chase scene: English police officers don’t carry guns, so to catch the killer there’s a merry car chase, then a foot chase, then he’s on foot and they’re in cars. The whole thing is very drawn out and short on suspense.

But there are also things to like, for example cameos by Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. It’s an interesting look at the changing face of technology. It’s also quite amusing to watch on VHS; there’s handy trivia on the box (like how critics at the time often remarked that the character Keith [Michael Gothard] looked like Mick Jagger), and the closed captions don’t work very well—people “urgle” rather than gurgle. Though it’s often corny, there are a few effective moments, mostly involving the poor jogger, who keeps waking up to find more and more of himself missing. The only person he sees makes no reply to his plaintive statement, “Nurse, what are they doing to me?” She sticks a tube in his mouth and walks away.

scream2 — He doesn’t have a leg to stand on

Since it’s the ‘70s and the censors were loosening up, there are references to drugs, and also gratuitous tit shots, as well as an instance of a woman lasciviously caressing a gear shift. So check it out if you want something classic, droll, and the opposite of prudish.

‘Rumpelstiltskin’: So Bad, it’s…Just Bad

Rumpelstiltskin (Max Grodénchik) is a goblin-type guy in the 1400s wanting to trick people into letting him grant them wishes so he can claim their first-born babies. The local villagers are less than pleased with his conduct and hunt him down, and a witch turns him into a statue. Flash-forward to present-day LA, when housewife Shelley’s (Kim Johnston Ulrich) husband Russell (Jay Pickett) has recently been gunned down by a carjacker. She buys the statue and cries on it, wishing that Russell could meet their son, which allows the creature to manifest himself in the flesh. Russell “returns”, and shortly after he reveals that he’s really Rumpelstiltskin (which is a cheat in my opinion, considering he didn’t actually bring Russell back from the dead—lawsuit!). Shelly is of course far from tickled at the prospect of losing baby John, and leads Rumpy on a merry chase. In the process she meets Max (Tommy Blaze), a talk show host who helps her out. Together with the help of another witch, they stop running and fight.

My sisters and I rented this in the mid-’90s when it was new, and about halfway through it our television’s picture tube quit. Yes, the movie’s so bad it broke my TV. The opening is less than auspicious, the title card reading “Somewhere in Europe—1400’s.” Vague and an unnecessary apostrophe. Rumpelstiltskin tells the crowd, “Come. Bring the pain.” That’s only the first in a series of terrible one-liners, for example “Fucketh me.” There are also goofy goings-on like the monster’s severed arm flipping Shelley off.

rum4 — “Yes, please set me on fire! I crave the sweet release of death!”

Meanwhile Shelley’s best friend Hildy (Allyce Beasley) is profoundly irritating (she’s doing the lonely woman with a string of bad boyfriends bit), as is Max, who delivers most of his dialogue at the top of his voice. I’m also annoyed that Shelley is frustrated at Max for not immediately believing her crazy story and that later they make plans for a date, even though Russell has only been dead for eight months. In addition, the sound is off-kilter; Rumpelstiltskin’s words hardly ever match his lips, and the baby tends to cry silently.

rum3 — “I TOLD you, a goblin is trying to kidnap my baby because he brought my husband back from the dead! What part of that story are you having trouble with?”

Max Grodénchik gives a good performance as Rumpelstiltskin, at least as far as the physical; he hops and squats and runs very nimbly. But the rest of the acting isn’t great, and the movie is somewhat melodramatic. Further also, the way the film is structured involves Shelley running away from the beast for about an hour, which gets really old. Give it a look if you’re in the mood for a Leprechaun rip-off without the charm of Warwick Davis.

rumpy1 — “Hoo, someone needs a diaper change!”

The Ruins: Give Plants a Chance!

College student Amy (Jena Malone), her boyfriend Jeff (Jonathan Tucker), Eric (Shawn Ashmore), and his girlfriend Stacy (Laura Ramsey) are on vacation in Mexico when they meet friendly Mathias (Joe Anderson), who invites them to join him on a trip to a Mayan temple that his brother is exploring. Once there, they discover the Mayan locals don’t cotton to visitors. Thanks to Amy touching temple vegetation, which is forbidden, the Mayans won’t let them leave. Between their captors, subsequent injuries, and the deadly plants that inhabit the ruins, their chances for survival dwindle fast.

The Ruins Movie — Their chances for survival and not smelling horrible

In some ways, the movie is hard to take seriously. While the events are wrenching and the main characters are sympathetic, it’s still premised on the idea of white American tourists being menaced by sinister, primitive villagers. Gah, look at these privileged assholes!

There are many parts of the movie that just seem silly, for example when Stacy is being lowered down a well to fetch Mathias, who has broken his back. She falls a couple of feet and cries “I cut my knee!” Stacy’s level of dismay over a minor injury compared to Mathias’s is ludicrous, and I laughed aloud the first time I saw it. I was quite disappointed on that viewing, but the movie stayed in my head and planted roots. I read the book, appreciated the movie more, and actually bought it when it came to video, as one did in 2008. After subsequent viewings, I came to love it. It’s gory, disturbing, and haunting. A scene that stays with me is when Stacy, who’s a bit barmy after having a plant growing inside her, pleads, “Why won’t you look at me?”

There are dozens of changes between the novel and film, not the least of which is killing off Pablo (Dimitri in the movie) early and placing the misfortunes that later befall him onto Mathias. The choice makes sense; Pablo is a throwaway character, and Mathias, while important, is never really on the same level of attachment for the reader as the four main characters—he doesn’t even get a narrative from his point of view. Though in the movie the characters are less complex and interesting, they are also far more likable. Jeff is less grumpy and contemptuous, Stacy is less whiny, Eric is less erratic, Amy is less cowardly, and Mathias is less cold and robotic. Although the novel does a better job of making the concept of sentient, mimicking plants seem not asinine but creepy, the film takes the plants’ intelligence to less of an extreme—they don’t create phantom smells or speak German.

ruins2 — “What’s that, Planty? Timmy’s stuck in a well?”

I also appreciate how less time in the movie is spent focusing on the lack of food and water; they don’t have to contemplate preserving a corpse with urine so they can eat it. The book and the screenplay were both written by Scott Smith, and they can be taken well as a set—check them out if you‘re in the mood for something highly charged and devastating.

Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘Rope’: Murder! Wit! More Gay Coloring Than You Can Shake a Stick at!

Brandon (John Dall) and Phillip (Farley Granger) kill their acquaintance David (Dick Hogan) because they want to test their theory that “Moral concepts of right and wrong don’t hold for the intellectually superior.” Phillip immediately regrets it, while Brandon is “tremendously exhilarated” (that’s ‘40s talk for orgasmic). They then proceed to throw the body in a trunk and have a dinner party, inviting David’s father (Cedric Hardwicke), aunt (Constance Collier), and girlfriend Janet (Joan Chandler). Things are going swell until their sharp-eyed college mentor Rupert (James Stewart) suspects they’re up to something, and they have to scramble to keep their secret.

Speaking of secrets, this film is notorious for Brandon and Phillip being lovers—subtextually. They live together, they’re often standing shoulder to shoulder, and they’re wont to say things like, “It’s such good crystal, and I hate to break up the set.” Then there’s dialogue like “Brandon would sit up ’till all hours at the master’s feet.” Not to mention Phillip’s drunken nelly hissy fits. Arthur Laurents, who wrote the screenplay, was dating Farley Granger at the time.

rope6 — Everything’s phallic! Everything!

The first time I watched the film I came away feeling the message was that heterosexuality triumphs over the nancy boy deviants. However, this time I noticed that Rupert could also be construed as gay; he’s described as “a little peculiar,” there’s no talk of a female love interest for him, he wears no wedding ring, and though he flirts with the maid, it’s clearly in jest (she’s frumpy). (In the original source material the movie was adapted from, Rupert was a much younger guy who definitely did mess around with dudes.) Also, Phillip lights a cigarette for him, which, as I learned in film class, is a sexual act in movies. Plus these are pretty suggestive:

Moving along, it’s based on a play and still has the feel of one; it’s heavily driven by dialogue, and there are few camera cuts—it’s mostly one continuous shot. I myself don’t mind, as I like plays, and I’m impressed by the work it must have taken to implement that technique. The acting and script are decent (until the end, when it becomes extremely melodramatic), and the plot is pretty original. And Janet is always a delight.

rope2 — “What would you say to some champagne?” Janet: “Hello, champagne.”–actual quote

Give it a look if you’re in the mood for something retro and groundbreaking.

‘The Rite’: Heavy-handed, but Delivered in a Creepy and Thoughtful Wrapping

Michael (Colin O’Donoghue) is a seminary student who is starting to wonder if he really wants to be a priest. Since the Church recently decided it wants an exorcist for every diocese, Michael is sent to exorcism school in Rome. He meets reporter Angelina (Alice Braga) and Father Lucas (Anthony Hopkins), a funny old guy who swears and answers his cell phone while exorcising. He’s currently working on a girl named Rosaria (Marta Gastini) (in the reality of the movie, exorcisms can take years). Unfortunately she dies, and the demon possessing her moves on to Father Lucas. Michael is forced to confront his inner demons and, with the help of Angelina, exorcise Father Lucas himself.

rit4 — The power of Christ compels you not to make a cheap ‘Exorcist’ joke!

As with many demon-themed horror movies, this one is staunchly pro-Christian, putting forth the idea that if demons exist, God must also exist. Father Lucas also brings up that the devil doesn’t want us to know that he exists so that he can manipulate us. He states that he loses faith regularly, but he always finds it again.

rit3 — Father Lucas–who crawled through a river of shit and came out clean on the other side

There are moments reminiscent of The Exorcist, like when the demon tries to manipulate the junior priest by taunting him with a dead parent. However, the film is pretty unique. It throws out some new ideas for the demon sub-genre, like Rosaria spitting up nails.

There is little in the way of comic relief—most of it comes from jolly old Father Lucas. I was bemused by a scene at the beginning when Michael is getting a body ready for a funeral (his father (Rutger Hauer) runs a funeral home out of their house); his father tells him to “wash up and come eat.” Yum yum—nothing works up an appetite like handling a corpse.

rit5 — ‘I should probably give these gloves a rinse before starting dinner…’

I don’t have any complaints about the film. Hopkins gives a smashing performance, as usual—his creepy possessed reptile face is worth the price of admission. Give it a look if you’re in the mood for something serious with enough action to keep things entertaining.

rit2 — Though this pre-Father Lucas possession image is creepy too–look how much he towers over her!