Wow -- what a hacky way to announce that I'm doing all horror films this month. Am I not even trying anymore, or what?
Squirm (1976, Jeff Lieberman) (v) [68]
Surprisingly effective; probably the best movie that could be made about killer albeit-otherwise-normal worms. Apparently some worms really do have fangs, as we get super close-ups of said choppers; the footage is repeated ad nauseum, but it does give the film a skin-crawling mood that otherwise might be lacking. Slow to get going, but decently-written characters (a slightly geeky city boy in the midst of small-town southerners) and a good location held my interest until things picked up. The climax is impressive, and creative: I don’t think I would’ve thought to turn the worms into a Blob-like menace, but that’s probably the only way to make it work. The jealous lunkhead who is driven insane from being half-eaten by worms is probably a bit of a cheat, but I suppose it has its roots in Caltiki, The Immortal Monster, and it leads to some nice complications, so I won’t bitch too much.
Scream, Blacula, Scream (1973, Bob Kelljan) (v) [43]
I’m a big fan of Kelljan’s Count Yorga films; more than Romero or Coscarelli, he’s been the architect of my nightmares ever since I first saw them, oh shit, about twenty years ago. All the usual Kelljan elements are here: the use of zombie motifs in a vampire context, the shock cuts, letting the monsters stare into the camera (so that it feels like they’re looking right at you), and a cultured vampiric villain who can turn monstrously violent in a flash. (Unsure, but I wonder if Buffy’s now-we’re-human-now-we’re-not vampires can be traced back to Kelljan; it’s clear to me, though, that Tobe Hooper’s 'Salem’s Lot owes a lot to him.) There’s some nice scenes, including a very tense vigil over a soon-to-be reanimated body. Yet, despite all this, the film’s a complete disappointment, even with Pam Grier. Mostly, it’s the script; Yorga, unlike Blacula, was never meant to be sympathetic, and Kelljan can’t accommodate that sympathy (give him pure evil any day). And although there’s a nice police vs. vampires climax inside a mansion, it doesn’t have the pressure cooker quality of his previous films, and kind of drags from scene to scene. The final scene is nicely abbreviated though; guess they had to work that title in there somehow…
I like these meaty blurbs on, shall we say, negligible horror flicks. I need to beef up my own writing a little, as well. I need to learn to ramble, not that you're doing that at all.
Posted by: Scott at October 13, 2004 04:33 PMThanks, especially for thinking that a) they're meaty, and b) I'm not rambling; I'm not sure I would always agree :-) But it's funny; these negligible horror movies do seem to bring more out of me than more popular or at least well-known movies. Is it simply because there hasn't been much written about them? Probably. All I know is, writing up SHAUN OF THE DEAD is gonna be hell, since I don't think I can say anything that J.R. Jones didn't already say in the Chicago Reader.
Posted by: kza at October 13, 2004 07:10 PMI have to admit that I often enjoy watching negligible horror flicks--old and new--more than many other, better movies. I'm watching THE FORSAKEN this week, for Christ's sake! The problem I have with writing about them is that I am obsessed with going back and starting over. I never think anything I write is any good.
Posted by: Scott at October 13, 2004 07:27 PMHey, speaking of Horror, I just got my hands on the first season of Sledgehammer (you know, the mock-cop sitcom) on DVD.
Let me know if you want to check it out, I'd enjoy reading your comments!
mobb
Posted by: mobb at October 15, 2004 07:43 AM