Film No.12

Attachment 183471

Kevin has just lost his wife while giving birth to their first child. Descending on a rapid downward spiral Kevin contemplates suicide but he cant go through with it instead he heads to an underground store selling rare vinyl extreme films and occult objects. The guy behind the counter recommends a book to contact the dead but warns Kevin to be careful and prepared for what he is getting himself into but these words of caution fall on deaf ear Keven is only interested in contacting his wife. It does not take long before Kevins life turns into complete chaos involving murder sacrifice and mutilation.

There is barely a word muttered through the whole film just a few exchanges here and there. The whole focus is on the mental breakdown of Kevin and how far he is willing to go to bring his wife back from the dead. The whole film feels like one big nightmare that he cannot wake up from. There is tons of blood from start to finish and most of the gore looks great for what budget they had everything is practical which shows no matter how little money you have you can still do it properly or at least make a good stab at it. We get everything from smashed faces self inflicted gunshot to the vagina to picking bugs out of a penis and more vagina based horror. This is not for everyone only for anyone looking for some over the top extreme gore so if thats not your thing better look else where for your horror fix. As for me i found it really entertaining not one you would watch over and over but well worth a revisit from time to time.

7/10

Almost Human (2013)

http://zardoz.a.ltrbxd.com/resized/f...g?k=403c807f74

A gooey, lean, low budget alien abduction/return film that has its heart firmly planted in the '80s, homaging films such as The Thing and Xtro, to name but a couple.

Some nice practical effects can't really disguise some of the poor acting and the limitations of the shoe-string budget no matter how much it tries to put them front and centre, unfortunately. Despite the fairly short run-time and sparse script there is also a sense of this one overstaying its welcome a little.

An interesting experiment which shows a lot of passion and love for the genre and based on what I've seen here, I'd certainly be inclined to check out the director's subsequent film 'The Mind's Eye' if the opportunity arises.

51/100

I have to say, I don't think that reviewer is too far off the mark with his observations, but I think his points are what I liked about it. It was just a bit of a laugh. Ripping off a load of successful films to try and bring a bit of bread to the table. That's the heart and soul of a lot of exploitation films. I didn't like the original Amityville Horror, so I went into this one not expecting too much and I was pleasantly surprised. I taped it off the Horror Channel, so I didn't part with any of my own bread to have the pleasure of watching it. I probably wouldn't have even bothered if it didn't have 3D in the title...

:-D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spawn. 7.2/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpr7TTnXty8

:lol: That was my review for it. :lol:

Have you seen the second film? The first half is rather decent before it degrades into a poor Exorcist rip-off.

If you haven't already, check out The Visitor. It's like a clone of The Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby and The Omen but then runs off in its own strange direction. It's absolute madness and features the weirdest cast ever (including Sam Peckinpah as a doctor).

one of the most weird films i have seen and leaves you at the end think WTF have i just watched!

think its one to add to the halloween pile

The Food of the Gods (1976, USA)
 

The Food of the Gods (1976)


Attachment 183484

You would think that H.G.Wells would have better things to write about rather than giant insects and rodents,unlike Bert I.Gordon who obviously had nothing better to do than direct films about giant insects and rodents.. Perhaps Bert is playing on our inherent childhood fears of creepy crawlies,which would explain the giant plastic wasps.Although I can not ever remember ever being concerned about being pecked to death by a giant chicken or as a child ever worrying about it. Amongst all the silliness of creatures being giant,there are a couple of unexpected moments that do make you go Eughhh,namely the giant sized maggots that attach themselves to Ida Lupino's arm. On the other hand the normal sized rats gnawing on the toy Volkswagen and its occupant was a little under whelming. And what is causing this enlarging of the animal glands??? Well the food ozzes up from the ground (yeah a bit like The Stuff) and because the farmer and his wife do not know what else to do with it so yeah lets feed this unknown crap to our farm animals, I mean what could go wrong? If Bert is using the giant animals as subtext,then remember where ever there is giant animals,giant animal shit will follow. As one character points out to Ida,your only sin is your god damn stupidity,and its some cracking dialogue like that and the fact that everybody involved seems to be taking it seriously which gives the film its charm.


Lorna Scott: Nothing happens to the full-grown chickens, is that right?

Mrs. Skinner: Well, they didn't grow none, if that's what you mean. But I didn't say nothing happened to 'em.

Lorna Scott: Well, what did happen?

Mrs. Skinner: They got eat... by the real big ones.

I enjoyed that review, sir.

Brighten the thread up a bit...
 

The Shining (1980)

Phenomena (1985)

Dracula (2013)

A ten part series which re-imagines Stoker's Dracula as he arrives in London, posing as an American entrepreneur who maintains that he wants to bring modern science to Victorian society. In reality, he hopes to wreak revenge on the people who ruined his life centuries earlier. However, his plan is complicated when he falls in love with a woman who seems to be a reincarnation of his dead wife.

I enjoyed this series, Jonathan Rhys Meyers made a fine Dracula, he even looked the part, certainly more so than any of the recognized actors playing the count for Universal or Hammer. In terms of the book the series is nothing like it. In fact it's final scene sets up the story we know and love with Van Helsing (Thomas Kretschmann) sending Jonathan Harker (Oliver Jackson-Cohen) to find and kill Dracula, so everything that goes before it is new fiction. New fiction with vigorous splashes of steamy sex and copious blood shed naturally.

So much is new and different and so much works. Van Helsing works with Dracula on a solar vaccine to allow Dracula to walk in the daylight, their partnership adds a whole new dimension to proceedings as does Dracula's relationship with Renfield - a charming hulk of a man played by Nonso Anozie - and the main plot with Dracula searching to destroy the Order of the Dragon now operating in London, the religious group responsible for the death of his wife, is wholly enjoyable as are the performances by Ben Miles who leads the order and Victoria Smurfit as Lady Jayne Wetherby, a fashionable huntswoman out to kill vampires (imagine Seline from the Underworld films but with a heaving cleavage).

The wireless electricity technology subplot isn't as compelling as it should be and i think the Mina Murray / Lucy Westenra love triangle at times slowed things to a near standstill, however on the whole Dracula worked rather nicely and came across as a better reinvention of classic horror characters than Penny Dreadful's first season for example. It's a shame it wasn't taken up for a second outing.

I kept seeing previews of this one whilst I was working in Shanghai in 2013 and thought it looked terrible. However, based on your review I may be inclined to check it out at some point now.

If i was ranking Dracula's i'd say it's not as good as Hammers first film but is far superior to Argento's film and that Luke Evans thing from a few years back.

I can't really assess the Lugosi one fairly as it's terribly creaky and to be honest i imagine you are a better actor than Bela.

That wouldn't be difficult. Most people's early morning bowel movements are! :lol:

I've (thankfully) never even heard of that one!

Don't let Nordy hear you say that!! :axekiller:

Ah yes, I have heard of it... but not to the extent where I've been compelled to check it out.

I enjoyed it for what it is. I'd give it a *** out of *****.

Don't, it was horrible...and not in a good way.

Two conflicting opinions!

I may add it to my Love Film list under 'normal priority' and leave it to random chance to decide whether I watch it or not.

Been slightly lax keeping this updated...

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/...pss7wbpcyu.png
[07] In A Glass Cage
There’s a perverse grotesquery to Agusti Villaronga’s In A Glass Cage, but at the same time a deviant sexual thrill to it. It tells a chilling tale of victim and abuser, the cyclical nature of which is harrowing. The whirring breathy mechanism of the iron lung thrumming throughout, the sparse but delicately composed framing, the lighting becoming more garish and lurid in conjunction with the action unfurling on screen, it delivers an unmatched atmosphere, completely unique, malefic. There’s very little innocence, only that which is taken. There’s a sense of complicity to characters, not to suggest that characters deserve their fates, merely to illustrate impurity, a phone call from Griselda reveals she’s aware of Klaus’ history, Rena fails to correct a lie, becoming entangled with Angelo in his deceit, even one of the children Angelo lures is motivated by greed. The film provokes the viewer, in one scene Angelo opens the iron lung and mounts a helpless Klaus, writhing on top of him while he gasps for air, in another Angelo masturbates, wiping his hand over Klaus’ face, then fetching Griselda to show her what he has done to her husband. It’s a bleak film, spellbinding in the lack of virtuousness, sexually charged and abhorrently compelling.
:pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin:

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/...pskgxilirh.png
[08] Short Night Of Glass Dolls
With the protagonist Gregory Moore (Jean Sorel) being declared medically dead in the opening, Aldo Lado’s Short Night Of Glass Dolls takes a distinctive approach to the giallo, the events unfolding in flashback, as his corpse recalls what led him to being put in the morgue, while willing the doctors to find some way to resuscitate him. With lingering shots of art and architecture, all beautifully composed within the film's frame, Short Night Of Glass Dolls is impeccably classy. There’s an elegance that is completely at odds with the baleful final moments, which makes them all the more shocking. The mystery is compulsive, not just of Gregory’s condition, and eventual fate, but that of his girlfriend Jessica. Short Night Of Glass Dolls is a slow burn, revealing just enough to engage, but not so much as to overcook the dramatic revelations.
:pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin:

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/...pso5f4mcwq.png
[09] What Have You Done To Solange?
Massimo Dallamano’s What Have You Done To Solange? is teeming with deception, and secrets. Fabio Testi plays Enrico, a teacher at a college who becomes embroiled in a murder investigation after a string of his students are found butchered. There’s a grisly symbolism to the way the girls are murdered and the motive behind the killings. The mystery is complexly woven, engaging in the drip feed of information and events, so much so that we don’t even hear the name of the title character until the latter half of the movie. The film has a peculiar moral compass, surprisingly so given the religious undertones. There’s a disconnect in the way female characters are punished for their sins compared to male characters. Enrico’s affair is seemingly acceptable because his wife is cold and aloof, and his wife attempts to win him back by helping to solve the murder of the girl he was having an affair with. There’s no retribution for the sin of the character that got Solange in her predicament to begin with, nor any kind of mention of him, which is completely bewildering given the identity of the killer. The curious ethical dynamics are one of the reasons I’ve always found What Have You Done To Solange? so fascinating, there’s not just a captivating mystery, there’s a multifaceted, layered narrative that is thematically rich.
:pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin:

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/...pszghytfhl.png
[10] The Sweet Body Of Deborah
Romolo Guerrieri’s The Sweet Body Of Deborah stars Carroll Baker as the titular Deborah, and Jean Sorel as her husband Marcel, on honeymoon to Marcel’s home town, where he receives a frosty reception from former friend Philip (Luigi Pistilli), accusing him of murdering his late fiancé. It opens beautifully, a picturesque town by the sea, dreamy score, while laying the foundations for the mystery. The visit to Marcel’s former fiancé’s villa is a particular highlight, clearly once very regal, now in a state of dilapidation, replete with strange music playing from a piano that hasn’t been used in years and a creepy phone call from a phone that is disconnected. It’s very typical of the genre, but is done effortlessly well and sets an ominous tone. Sadly the mystery at the heart of the film is put aside for much of the middle section, where the film loses steam, held aloft only by the zany outfits Carroll Baker is subjected to wear. Things eventually get back on track, with a gripping finale overflowing with deception, blackmail and the occasional double cross. It’s far from one of the better inheritance motivated gialli, but it has some indelible scenes and for the most part is an engaging thriller.
:pumpkin::pumpkin::pumpkin:

Short Night Of Glass Dolls started a week of Italian horror for me (although they're all gialli, with the exception of Mill Of The Stone Women). By coincidence, unless there are sinister subliminal forces at work beyond my comprehension, The Sweet Body Of Deborah is my second of three gialli starring Jean Sorel. The final one being Lizard In A Woman's Skin. Italian week is frequently my favourite and it's started off extremely well. I'm already eyeing my relatives wondering who and how I can knock them off for the inheritance. The quality of some of these on blu-ray is fantastic too. Short Night and Solange in particular. But Deborah was a complete surprise too, it started a little ropey looking and my heart sank, but it got much better looking after the opening scenes. Looking forward to diving into Arrow's Death Walks set, and Mondo Macabro's Lizard In A Women's Skin next.

Talk about setting the bar low! Argento's film was an abomination and Dracula Untold was a complete mess.

The 1931 Universal film is certainly an oddity because, of the two versions, the Spanish one is certainly the most competently directed, but Bela Lugosi is easily the better vampire count. However, he is nowhere near as compelling as Christopher Lee, Gary Oldman or even Frank Langella.

After picking these 2 up from poundland gonna change Halloween night to this double bill.

And for tonight's ABUKtober...

http://i65.tinypic.com/5xrds2.jpg

Prepare for a disappointing Halloween night! :tongue1:

Phantasm: Ravager. 6/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHqtIMBMxK4

enjoyable if not a little confusing and you really need to be paying attention, from they story it had the potential to be a great film but is let down by a poor director and could of done with a lot bigger budget, it answers a few questions but ends up leaving more question, not the ending to the series that we expected, drawing it to a close but ends up set it up for more films.

but without Angus they shouldn't bother as he will always be the tall man and if they took as long as they have to get a new film out as they did for this one, Reggie etc will be as old as Angus was when he passed

next up tonight return of the living dead

Watched a cracking UK double bill of PSYCHOMANIA and BLOODBATH AT THE HOUSE OF DEATH last night.:cool:

BFI's Psychomania looks astounding!:scared:

Haven't watched this since I originally bought the old Euroshock collection dvd!

Frankenstein (1931)

Frankenstein - a name synonymous with the horror genre for one reason - this film from Universal Studios, this film from nearly a century ago. Whole books have been written about this film, it's sequels and the Universal monster legacy as a whole, so influential are they not only on horror cinema but cinema in general.

Frankenstein is a seminal film which belies it's age with each repeat viewing. A macabre masterpiece which fixed the monstrous image of the creature into the publics consciousness where it remains today. Frankenstein is a fascinating if primitive work that launched it's director (James Whale) and star (Boris Karloff or ? if you read the opening cast list) on interesting and in Karloff's case highly successful paths, and even though based on German expressionist silent works it established the horror film as a viable genre for Hollywood.

The film was seen as shocking in it's day and still plays as a genuinely creepy experience. The idea of a man playing God as Colin Clive does with his 'It's alive' speech and the lakeside sequence with the little girl fell foul of censors for decades to come even though today it all seems rather tame.

The film belongs to Boris Karloff. He breathes life into a career best and definitive portrayal of an on screen monster being both terrifying and sympathetic, witness Frankenstein's servant Fritz (Dwight Frye) torturing the creature with flames and the touching moment where the creature reaches up to grasp a ray of sunlight. James Whale also contributes to the grand scheme of things with his innovative direction and sometimes wayward camera angles that create an at times tense and at others melancholic atmospheres of Gothic horror mixed with science.

Everyone on here who reads this should have seen the film, nay, everyone should own the film such is it's historical impact on cinema and the horror genre.

Think I'll start classic universal monster movies this weekend, might give Dracula a miss as for me its one of the weakest and like others never been keen on Lugosi Dracula give me Lee any day of the week over Lugosi

My mate raved about V/H/S a couple of years back, and the idea seems cool, finding a big pile of VHS tapes as a portmanteau device. But you of course might be right and I end up chucking em in a pumpkin:lol::lol:

I totally agree with B_E on this one, Plato.

I think I managed the first story before I turned off and sold it, so I never bortherd with the second. But Different strokes for different folks.

I really enjoyed Dracula Untold. The Argento film was shittypoo though.

Ditto on both counts.

Zoltan, Hound of Dracula) (1978,
 

Zoltan Hound of Dracula (1978)

Well another thing we can blame on the Russians is the release of zoltan hell hound,while on manoeuvres the Russian army inadvertently disturb the crypt of the Dracula family.And one poor zap who is left to guard the inside of the crypt manages to bring back to life the eye glowing fangtastic zoltan hound of dracula.In a doggie flashback sequence we are shown how Zoltan became the vampiric pup and this soon spurs him on to bring back his undead master from errr the undead. So Zoltan and his sidekick Reggie Nalder,who dressed in black and wearing dark sunglasses and the skin of a rotting orange set off on an adventure to find the last living Dracula which happens to be Micheal Pataki. Zoltan and Reggie manage to follow Micheal and his family while holidaying in there motorhome complete with dogs and puppies in tow. If your looking for an anti dote for the Twilight films or maybe something more grown up than say Lost Boys,then Zoltan may be for you,vampiric pups an ever growing vampire dog army and Michael Dracula. And who is to blame for all this canine shenanigans? Well Albert Band of course the producer of Troll and such like. Well when you can not even trust man's best friend from ripping your throat out and turning you into a vampire then you know you have watched to many low budget horror movies,and just when you thought it was safe to turn off the dvd,that final twist in the story,yes of course a vampire puppy.

The Carrier (1988)

http://skyfall.a.ltrbxd.com/resized/...g?k=6e08493a66

This adheres to the unbreakable law of film physics, which states: “Films with ridiculous premises that take themselves seriously are exponentially more ridiculous”.

However, through all the ridiculous-ness comes a bucket load of entertainment (most of it unintentional mind) as a small rural town gets to grips with a strange contamination originating from a sole ‘carrier’, after being bitten by ‘The Black Thing’ no less, who whilst immune themselves involuntarily spreads the infection to every object that they touch. Anyone else touching the contaminated object is then gradually dissolved into a pile of gloop. Cats are then deemed necessary to be used to test whether objects are infected and an oddly large amount of the run-time is dedicated to the townsfolk rounding up all the strays that they can find.

Cue mass hysteria which sweeps through the town leading the populace to dress up in all manner of plastic protective clothing – notably bin bags – in order to try and avoid being infected and therefore puddle-ised. There is the classic ‘science vs. religion debate’ which leads to different factions springing up within the town, and luckily for the viewers the ‘good guys’ choose to adorn themselves in white plastics whilst the ‘bad guys’ in black. How thoughtful. The bulk of the film though however is just people getting hysterical and angry whilst fighting over and trying to trap cats in order to test every object they need to come into contact with whilst manically trying to seek out ‘the carrier’.

The bizarre-factor is certainly the main draw in this one and you can’t help but think that the director was trying to make some kind of socio-political statement in terms of an allegory for the AIDS epidemic, which was prevalent and ‘newsworthy’ at the time. Unfortunately any statement gets lost amongst all the plastic fashion chic and cats… no wonder this was his one and only directorial effort.

56/100

The Nest (1988)

http://oblivion.a.ltrbxd.com/resized...g?k=ac610aa73a

I have to admit that I found this one a bit boring. Perhaps it’s because I watched it just after The Carrier and my brain could not yet comprehend nor compute a film deficient in cats, but it was overly talky and lacking in atmosphere – except for the final act where the pace picks up.

Unfortunately, by then it’s a little too late, although some nice gooey effects work does save it from being a total anti-climax. This is definitely no ‘Bug’ (or ‘Slugs’ for that matter). Plus, like a lot of ‘80s horror movies this is guilty of having a very misleading poster.

48/100

Mis-leading poster? You mean no cockroaches having sex with nubile young ladies in there panties.

Exactly! :tsk:

Interesting to note that giant cockroaches have more respect for women than Donald Trump.

I'm not going to bother ordering it then. :pout: