Last Blog On The Left

Hello, fiends!
It´s not that often that I get to see an Australian horror movie. I think this is unfortunate, considering the fact that the Aussies have a pretty good track record when it comes to genre filmmaking (“Razorback”, the “Mad Max”-series). Back in 1998 an Australian kid named Jamie Blanks found his way over to the states and directed a film called “Urban Legend”. I´m sure that most of you are familiar with this one. It´s not an exceptionally good film and many people down-right loathes it. I found it to be quite entertaining and Blanks at least showed some promise when it came to staging and filming the obligatory death scenes that a slasher film of this type requires. I don´t know about you, but I was looking forward to Blanks next film and thought that he showed some promise. That promise was shattered in a big way when I sat down to watch his next film. The film I´m talking about is the awful “Valentine” (2001), starring one of the worst actresses ever: Denise Richards! This film represents everything that is wrong with the horror genre nowadays: bland leading actors, uninteresting story and a script that seemed to have been written in a day. After seeing this I was about to re-evaluate my opinion regarding “Urban Legend”. Was it really entertaining? Maybe it sucked, too? Could I have been under the influence when I saw it? These were thoughts that flying through my head.

It´s seems that maybe Blanks had these thoughts too cause he haven´t made much noise since that awful waste of film stock. Until now, that is. Last night I sat down to watch the newly released “Storm Warning” and we ain´t seen nothing yet of Blanks is capable of. Where “Urban Legend” was a funny spin on the teenagers-in-peril-genre and “Valentine” an abomination, “Storm Warning” is a brutal, bloody exercise in terror. The plot is simple: a couple stumbles upon an inbred backwoods family, who decides to take them prisoner. What separates this film from the millions of others made from the same mold is that Blanks have the guts to let the movie take its time and build the suspense before unleashing the blood and guts on the viewer. The story reminded me of an R-rated version of “Goldilocks and the three bears” and it´s even referenced in the movie and believe me, this is not the kind of R that the MPAA gives to big budget action movies. This is a hard, excruciating, brutal R. Blanks certainly gives us horrorhounds our money worth in its final 30 minutes.

The plot is the kind of plot that´s been used over and over again in thousands upon thousands horrorfilms, ever since “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (1974) was a smash hit and this film certainly reminds me of a 70´s style horror film. Except the fact that it wears its “Texas Chainsaw”-influences proudly on its sleeve, it´s also pretty obvious that Blanks is a big fan of such survivor classics as “Deliverance” (1972) and “Straw Dogs” (1971). Some of you might say that this sounds like it´s just another tired entry in the so-called “torture porn” subgenre, but I beg to differ. I don´t wanna ruin the film for you but Blanks cleverly stages Everett De Roche´s script and it´s a beautifully twisted, dark, sadistic and perverted script. Apparently, De Roche wrote the script back in the 70´s but he never managed to get it financed and this really feels like a 70´s horror film. De Roche is an accomplished writer as his other scripts for “Patrick” (1978), “Long Weekend” (1978), “Roadgames” (1981) and “Razorback” have shown. These are all great films, especially “Long Weekend”. It´s a truly haunting variation on the nature-strikes-back-theme and it seems that Blanks latest project also is a collaboration with De Roche. They´ve decided to remake “Long Weekend” and I think that could be pretty damn interesting. It´s themes of exploiting Mother nature is more current today than ever. I know that many of you are getting really tired of remakes, but that´s a whole ´nother story… I´m really looking forward to this duo´s future collaborations.

Stay ghoul, stay sick & stay in touch!

I´ve been a fan of William Friedkin ever since I first saw ”The Exorcist” back when I still wasn´t old enough to got the bathroom by myself. That film is a classic and I think that we can all agree upon that. Whether you like it or not, you can´t ignore the impact that film have had on our culture. I think that it still holds up today and I thought that the much critized “Version you hadn´t seen” that was released a couple of years ago, also works. However, William Friedkin is one of those directors (or “auters”) that makes his film according to the hit-or miss-principle. When he´s good, he´s really, REALLY good and when he´s bad he directs films like “Rules of Engagement” (2000). He´s always interesting, though. When Friedkin releases a new film, I have to see it. I don´t care how it´s received by the critics. Even if it´s maligned, I know that Friedkin on a bad day still kicks most Hollywood directors asses. He seldom makes boring films. Hell, I even enjoyed “The Guardian” (1990). It´s one of those guilty pleasures I have. You know the kind of films I´m talking about, right? The ones that everyone but you seem to dislike and maybe you won´t admit that you like in front of people but you still watch it from time to time or whenever it pops up on late night TV. The thing is that Friedkin got off to a really good start and it´s hard to follow up on that. He got his big break with “The French Connection” (1971) and then followed up on that with “The Exorcist” (1973). If any other filmmaker managed to get those two films out of their system, they´d probably leave it at that. He managed to create pretty much two films that are among the ultimate in their respective genres: the cop thriller and horror. Then he went on direct a fantastic film that many people hate, “Cruising” (1980). It´s a depraved, lurid thriller starring Al Pacino as an undercover cop who has to infiltrate the gay/leather scene. In 1985 he pretty much set the bar for every cop thriller ever made since then with “To Live and Die In L.A.”.

After that, Friedkin hasn´t made much noise. He directed “Jade” (1995) which were supposed to be an erotic thriller, but it wasn´t very erotic. I´ve already mentioned “Rules of Engagement”, a film that I really dislike. In “The Hunted” (2003) he managed to find some new ways to shoot knife fights but the script wasn´t much to speak of. So, when everyone has stopped counting on good old William, what does he do? He directs a low budget, psychological thriller called “Bug” (2006), starring Ashley Judd, Michael Shannon and Harry Connick, JR. I finally got around to watching this film a couple of weeks ago and it refuses to leave my mind. I can´t get it out of my head. It didn´t make much noise when it was released in a limited theatrical run last year and the studio decided to market it as a straight up sci-fi-horror film in order to cash in on Friedkin´s pedigree with “The Exorcist”. This film is not a horror film in the typical sense of the word. It´s definitely a horrific film and it has elements of horror but it´s more of the psychological kind. Ashley Judd portrays Agnes, a waitress who has escaped her abusive ex-husband (Connick, JR). She lives in a run-down motel where she hooks up with Peter, played to perfection by Michael Shannon. His perception of the world and how it works isn´t exactly like yours and mine. This film basically deals with paranoia and how when you´re in need of love and tenderness, it can let you be dragged into someone elses destructive behavior. “Bug” is a slow-burning, creepy tale about paranoia and drug abuse and if anyone of you have ever spent time around crystal meth users, you will probably recognize their way of reasoning.
It´s a pretty hard film to define but I really recommend it. It´s not an easy watch and it reminds of one of those sad songs that you can´t get out of your head. You don´t WANT to go around and hum on it all day, but you can´t help yourself. It keeps popping into your head. It´s a strong film and if you´re ready for some real human horror, this is one for you.
Like I said at the beginning, I really like William Friedkin and it feels good to know that he´s still got it in him and still packs a punch… I just wish that he´d stop “Bug”-ging me.

Take scare!

I gotta admitt something. I love horror. I don´t like it. I love it in a near-obsessive, not totally healthy way and have been doing that since I was a little kid and saw “Jaws” for the first time. As you might have noticed, this is not an unusual thing among horror fans. Many of them tend to be fans of the rabid kind and are staunch, if not fanatic, supporters of their favourite actors and directors. I certainly am guilty of this. For example, if John Carpenter releases a new film, I´ll probably like it. That´s the way it works in this world. If Clive Barker publishes a new book, I´m gonna probably like that one, too. It´s not unlike the way that people who are into sports have their favourite teams. You have your favourite actors and directors that you root for. With that said, let me get to the point…

One of my all time favourite actors is a gentleman by the name of Bruce Campbell. I know that he´s not gonna get an academy award and he´ll probably never receive any critic´s choice awards or anything like that, but I don´t care. If you ask me, Bruce Campbell is one of the best things to happen to the movie industry since they invented the camera. One of the things that I, and many others, love about him is the fact that he´s very aware of the fact that he´ll never receive any kind of awards. He knows his place in the foodchain of showbusiness, but he seems to be totally alright with where he is. Most of the time he pops up in straight-to-video clunkers made for the Sci-Fi Channel like “Terminal Invasion” (2002) or “Timequest” (2000). I have sat through these films and it wasn´t pretty. They were not good. They were not good in any means of the word, but what do you do? If you´re into soccer or american football, you gotta sit through the games where your team suck, right? The only difference is that Bruce Campbell never sucks. Never ever. He doesn´t let a bad script and a low budget get in the way of his unstoppable charm, sardonic wit and cheesy sense of humour… and that is why, ladies and gentlemen, he is one of the greatest actors to ever walk this planet. Because the thing is this, Bruce always bounces back. He will never go away. After sitting through these poorly made sci-fi wrecks of movies you know that he´ll always pop up in an uncredited cameo in either the Coen brothers´ latest film or in one of Sam Raimi´s “Spiderman“-installments. Let´s face it, the best thing about “Spiderman 3” was Bruce Campbell´s french waiter. And you can´t try to tell me that “Bubba Ho-Tep” isn´t one of the greatest films ever. Bruce Campbell as the old Elvis? That´s the best casting ever! Just to show that he can be serious he delivered a credible turn in Lucky McKee´s criminally underrated “The Woods” (2006) as Agnes Bruckner´s dominated father. I´ll be the first one to admit that maybe this wasn´t a powerhouse of a performance, but you see, the thing is that he got away with it. He showed everyone that he could in fact deliver a performance where he didn´t make fun of himself all the time. He could actually be serious and he proved all nay-sayers wrong. But hey, I admit it… who wants Bruce to play a serious brooding character? I don´t. I don´t want him to stray too much from the formula. He´s best when he´s playing a rather rude, kind of obnoxious guy who thinks he´s great at everything he does. The kind of character that made him famous, with the “Evil Dead”-movies and kind of like in his latest film, which he has also directed and where he plays… himself! Check out this trailer:

This has got to be THE film of the year. After I watched this trailer the first time, I got a warm, fuzzy feeling inside and I felt like a little kid again. I know, I KNOW that this will be one of the highlights of my year. I´ve already forgotten about “Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the crystal skulls”, the countdown has started for the opening of “My Name Is Bruce”… and don´t you forget it!

Stay ghoul, stay sick & stay in touch!

Good mourning, ghouls!

Remember sometime back in 1999, when you sat down in the familiar darkness of your local movie theatre, all excited about seeing the latest horror success. This was apparently a revolutionary film and supposed to be frightening as hell. There were reports from around the world about people fainting and running out, screaming, from the movie theatre. The movie was… “The Blair Witch Project”! Flash forward 90 minutes and then try to remember the disappointment you felt. The movie was supposedly to be based on true events and the footage was supposed to be real. Of course, you knew that this was not the case since you saw the girl with snot pouring out her nose on Letterman the previous week. She was very much alive, despite you wishing she wasn´t after enduring an hour and a half of her whining and bickering. However, this revolutionary new approach wasn´t so new, after all. Didn´t Ruggero Deodato do this way before with the notorious “Cannibal Holocaust”? Yes, and here´s what I´ve discovered recently: that subgenre within horror that we can call “found footage”-horror or horror-“mockumentaries” or what the hell ever, seems to be making a comeback. And in a big way, too…

Recently I sat down to watch a newly produced entry in the cannibal genre, called “Welcome to the jungle” (no, it´s not the one starring The Rock). This flick consisted of the found footage taken by a bunch of friends who traveled to New Guinea in hope of finding the missing millionaire Michael C. Rockefeller, who disappeared in these jungles sometime in the sixties. This part of the story is actually based on fact. Michael Rockefeller DID disappear and there were reports that he didn´t die but were in fact kept alive as a sort of living tribal fetish. This were never verified, as you might´ve guessed. It´s an interesting premise for a film, however. This film is basically a remake of “Cannibal Holocaust” but in no way does it deliver the same amounts of shocks, jolts, thrills and tidal waves of emotions as “Cannibal Holocaust” does. It´s not totally uninteresting but it does seem to take its cue from “Blair Witch” when it comes to its characters arc. The director, Jonathan Hensleigh, seems to have mistaken the kind of whining and crying that Heather in “Blair Witch” was so good at, for character-development. I fail to see it and for about 50 minutes “Welcome to the jungle” is pretty uninteresting but for the last half hour, Hensleigh seems to be on to something. That´s when he starts to utilizing the handheld footage-approach in a pretty effective way. The end is pretty exciting and it´s because Hensleigh seems to realize that there´s no way that he can top “Cannibal Holocaust”, so he doesn´t even try. He goes the “Blair Witch”-approach and more suggests the violence than actually showing it. I know that this may not sit too well with all the gorehounds out there. What´s a cannibal movie without the extreme gore, right? Well, maybe I´m getting old but I thought it worked. That´s when the “found footage”-genre REALLY works, when you just show a glimpse of the horrific events that´s taking place and that´s why the last half hour of “Welcome to the jungle” is so effective.

Another entry into this subgenre of “found footage” is currently making its way around the world´s movie theatres and is doing pretty well. I´m talking about “Cloverfield”. You all know about it by now and if you haven´t seen it, you´ve probably read all about it and how this one is done: a couple of friends at a party, shooting a farewell-video to a friend that´s moving ends up in the middle of a giant monster-attack on Manhattan. When I walked into the theatre the other day and looked at the movie poster, it reminded me of the poster of one of the greatest film of all time, “Escape from New York”. You know the one I´m talking about, right? It´s the one where Snake Plissken is sitting in front of the broken head of the Statue of liberty. A movie that makes you draw that kind of parallels can´t be all bad, right? It can´t and it isn´t. “Cloverfield” is actually one of the most entertaining films I´ve seen in quite a while. It´s basically an old fashioned monster movie but by taking the “Blair Witch”-approach they manage to place the characters in the middle of the attack and the chaos it causes. It´s told from the same point of view the entire time and it really works. There´s no hero who´s coming in to save the day, just these ordinary guys trying to escape. This isn´t by any means a perfect film but it´s pretty damn entertaining and the filmmakers really makes use of the handheld approach when it comes to showing the monster. We never get a really good look at it, even though it´s captured on film several times. We do get the scope of it and that´s why it works. I don´t think that they would´ve gotten away with this if they would´ve done the film in a traditional manner.
So where do we go from here? Is there any way to take this fake documentary style any further? I have no idea, but I do have a feeling that we´ll be seeing a lot more of this approach in horror in the following years. “The Poughkeepsie Tapes” is a film that´s been garnering some notoriety at film festivals around the world and it supposedly consists of the found tapes of a serial killer. It´s a pretty inexpensive way to get your film out there, so I´m pretty certain we´ll be seeing “Blair Witch”-and “Cannibal Holocaust”-knockoff´s for years to come. I just hope that they´re more entertaining than Heather Donahue´s snot-filled nose.

Stay ghoul, stay sick & stay in touch!

Hello, ghouls!
Another year has passed and we´re all one year closer to the grave. Some of us have already been there so we know what lies in store for us. We hope that you survived Christmas.

2007 was a great year for us. Our debut album will be hitting the stores in February and we have a feeling that 2008 will be a good year for horrorpunk. Our good friends The Spookshow will be releasing their third instalment in their ongoing “Psychosexual”-saga and The Nightshift will also be releasing their debut album on Dr. Cyclops Records. We´re really looking forward to these releases so what are you gonna do while you pass the time, waiting for these masterworks to land in record store near you? You watch a lot of horror movies, of course! So that´s why we thought that we´d give you a quick rundown of what we thought were the best horror movies of 2007. Bear in mind that we haven´t had the time to watch as many as we would have liked to, but here´s the list of the best of the ones we actually managed to see… Enjoy!

HOSTEL Part 2

Eli Roth managed to keep our interest alive all through the second installment of his torture-and-nudity filled saga. The thing that worked really well and made this one surpass the original was the fact that we got to see more about how the organization worked and who their customers really are. Plus, the fact that Roth had the good taste to give Edwige Fenech a minor role as the art-teacher, didn´t make it any worse. Edwige Feneche had roles in such fantastic italian films as “Your vice is a locked room and only I have the key” and “Strip nude for your killer” during the seventies. She has been absent from the silver screen for way too long.

Rob Zombie´s HALLOWEEN

Rob Zombie continues to show that music needs to be his hobby. This is nearly as good as “The Devil´s Rejects” but then again, not many films are. Zombie´s main talent as a writer-director is that he´s exceptionally good at writing filthy dialogue and at keeping it down and dirty. This re-imagining/remake/interpretation/cover (or what the hell they call it nowadays) is really good, although the ending drags on a bit too long. I´d love to see Zombie do another instalment of this franchise. After all, it was pretty dead in the water after the obscenely awful “Halloween: Resurrection” from 2002 (Busta Rhymes and Tyra Banks in a “Halloween”-movie? Have mercy…) but Zombie brought it back to its gritty 70´s-roots and that´s where this franchise needs to remain if it doesn´t wanna turn into a joke again. This movie also hade one of the years greatest casts: Malcolm McDowell, Danny Trejo, Brad Dourif, William Forsythe, Udo Kier, Ken Foree and Sid Haig. What more do you want?

28 WEEKS LATER

The first one was a good film but this sequel is much better. I thought that the first half of “28 Days later” was great but when the militaries entered into it, the film fell apart. The director of this one, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (whose debut film “Intacto”, starring our favourite swede Max Von Sydow, is recommended viewing), manages to keep the story interesting and action engaging all the way. An excellent sequel that doesn´t skimp out on the gore.

THE HOST (Gwoemul)
Alright, I´ll admit it: This isn´t a fantastic film. It´s way too long for its own good but this films opening scene is one of the greatest ones… ever! That scene alone should guarantee this movie a spot on many “Greatest ever”-lists for years to come. I won´t spoil it for those of you who haven´t seen it but if you´re at all into monster movies, this is a more than worthy addition to the genre. Like many asian films the mix between action, suspense and humour doesn´t always sit right and like I mentioned earlier, it could do with some trimming in the editing room. There a couple of side stories that isn´t as interesting as the one that focuses on finding the monster´s lair but this is still one of the most enjoyable monster romps I´ve seen in the last couple of years.

VACANCY
A really entertaining “couples-in-peril”-flick starring Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale. This film aims to be a modern version of a Hitchcock film and even though it isn´t as stylish as old Hitch managed to be in the most cases, this is a really fun movie. Frank Whaley nearly steals the film as a creepy motel manager. It´s a fast-moving film with a plot that includes snuff movies and I gotta tell you, I have a real weakness for films that touches on the subject of “snuff”. “Snuff movies” is the ultimate urban legend that we have left and call me sick, call me twisted but the subject matter absolutely fascinates me. There was another movie released this year that also mostly took place in a hotel room, “1408″. I liked that movie too but I thought this one was by far more entertaining. I had some doubts about Luke Wilson as the lead actor in a horror film but he actually worked. I´d love to see a sequel or prequel where you got to see more about the whole “snuff”-network and how it worked, along the lines of “Hostel part II”. Anyway, check this one out. It´s a lot of fun.

GRINDHOUSE (DEATH PROOF & PLANET TERROR)
Unfortunately, us sorry bastards here in Sweden didn´t get to see “Grindhouse” in all its glory. Instead we got two separate releases of Tarantino´s “Death Proof” and Rodriguez “Planet terror”. Both films were longer, so we shouldn´t complain too much, right? This is a tricky one, when it comes to choosing a favourite. I think that “Death proof” is probably the best film of the two but “Planet terror” is definitely the one that´s the most fun. I still haven´t recovered from it. Everything in it: the music, the gore, the violence and the dialogue breathed 80´s horror and I absolutely loved it! However, there is one thing “Death Proof” has that “Planet Terror” doesn´t and that is… Kurt Russell! This is one of his best roles ever and that´s saying quite a bit. I´m talking about Snake Plissken, MacReady, Jack Burton, Elvis and now Stuntman Mike! There´s really no good way to describe with words how amazing Russell is in this movie. Like all great movie psychos, you can´t help but like him. Russell is irresistible and I hope that Tarantino uses him again. Josh Brolin and Michael Biehn are pretty damn cool in “Planet Terror”, too. Watch the separate DVD releases while we wait for the ultimate Grindhouse-experience.

ZODIAC
I know that this isn´t really a horror film but hear me out on this one… David Fincher is one of the most talented director working today. I´ve enjoyed all of his films. Hell, I even consider the third “Alien”-instalment the best one except for the first. I´ve gotten a lot of shit for that over the years, but I can´t help it. Fincher´s films are so dark and unrelenting that you can´t help but love them and “Alien III” is no exception. I am aware that “Zodiac” isn´t a horror film per se but it´s definitely horrific. This is more of a police procedural and the killer remains faceless. This kinda reminded me of Michael Myers a bit. Anyway, if you´re expecting “Seven part II” when you´re going into this you´re gonna be pretty disappointed. I have no idea how closely this follows the events that actually took place and I don´t really care about that. This is the most mesmerizing, harrowing and exciting film I saw last year. The films pace and mood draws you into it and even though the film clocks in around 155 minutes, I wasn´t bored once. I don´t know about you, but I´ve grown pretty weary when it comes to the never-ending serial killer genre. Really, when was the last time you saw good one? Hell, I haven´t even gotten around to watching “Hannibal Rising”, that´s how tired I am of the genre. But consider this: most serial killer movies doesn´t have Fincher directing Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Ruffalo. Even though this isn´t a full-on horror film, I still recommend it to horror fans. I think you´re gonna get a kick out of it.
Until next time: Stay sick, Stay ghoul & stay in touch!

Thomas Lovecraft