30 Days of Night

It’s no secret—I love horror movies, as I’ve said time and time again, and that’s the one genre I always have in mind when thinking about a title to watch.  My favorite of the bunch is slashers (the Friday the 13th franchise being my favorite), creature features and zombies, so is the werewolf variety and many others.  But the one genre that I enjoy watching is one that needs to be conveyed in a very, very good movie, one that needs to be scary and horrific with a great story and originality as well.  Because if this type of movie doesn’t have everything needed, including the correct rules and legends, to satisfy my horror pallet, then it falls flat.  The genre I’m referring to is the vampire assortment of films and the one that did a damn fine job of introducing a modern take on the lore is 30 Days of Night.

From the outset, when I’d heard about this film and what it was about, it had me intrigued.  I knew it was based on a comic book series of the same name, but I’d found out later was that this story was originally meant to be a movie when conceived, only made into a comic book when studios rejected the treatment.  All that aside, just hearing of how the story is about a group of vampires that take over an Alaskan town that goes through thirty days of darkness due to its fictional polar location had me stoked.  I just thought that it was brilliant and left me wondering how the bloodsuckers would be defeated when there was no sun to kill them.

Excellently directed by David Slade (Hard Candy) and conceived by Steve Niles, the story takes place in the small Alaskan town of Barrows as the residents get ready for the “thirty days of night,” as most of them leave for the winter, not wanting to go through the long period without daylight.  The Stranger (Ben Foster) wanders into town and ends up stealing and destroying all cell phones, incapacitates the town’s helicopter, kills all the sled dogs, and basically cuts the town off from the rest of the world.  Sheriff Eben Oleson (Josh Hartnett) starts investigating these strange crimes as darkness falls over the town.  When The Stranger causes raucous in the town’s diner, Sheriff Eben takes him in and locks him up.  Soon after, the remaining residents of Barrows are faced with what is hunting them and have to hide or fight back these powerful monstrosities.

Now, I like this film as a whole—everything within it is awesomely crafted and laid out, giving us one hell of a vampire flick.  But certain aspects of it stand out from the rest, pointing out the originality and creativity of the look of the film. 

First off, the look of the vampires is something we really haven’t seen before.  When most of us think of how vampires look, we think of normal-looking people who happen to have two extra-long canine teeth—sometimes being able to lengthen or shorten them at will—or having the ability to shape-shift their appearance.  Here, in 30 Days of Night, the vampires are simply monsters—large blackened pupils with distorted faces and a mouthful of razor sharp teeth, similar to a shark.  Basically, these aren’t your average vampires where they can easily blend in with the people of town—on the contrary, they stick out like a sore thumb.  They’re a little frightening to look at and you can imagine the fear the residents must feel when they come face-to-face with these creatures.

Another interesting item of note is the language they speak, almost alien as you can’t decipher it as being from another country or even from this world.  The way the vampires speak to one another is sort of guttural and animalistic, matching the way they look.  The fact that we never learn where they come from is an interesting subject to ponder, because there’s not much information given on their origins.  We only learn that they travelled to the area by cargo ship and that The Stranger had helped them somehow.  It’s also fascinating, in a way, that they all appear somewhat well-dressed.  All this adds up to some very scary-looking vampire creatures.

The set of Barrows was very well done, created to look very much like an Alaskan small town, completely isolated and claustrophobic in its compactness.  If it weren’t for the danger and darkness this town endures throughout this film, the burg would seem like a desirable place to live.  But it just goes to show you how, when an element of evil is introduced to an otherwise happy area, a relatively covetable township can turn to hell very quickly.

I also love the slow burn 30 Days of Night displays, how we don’t exactly see what the townies are up against right away, only giving us eerie scenarios where things may or may not be lurking in the shadows.  With the isolation of some of these scenes, it definitely gives you the understanding of trepidation these characters are feeling when they’re faced with it alone.  We get many of these scenes until the whole hoard of vampires is shown…and by that time, the whole town is in the midst of their domination.

If there was anything that I didn’t like, it wasn’t much to veer me from seeing this again when I decided to purchase the Blu-Ray.  Mainly, it was the scenes when the survivors of the town decided to find sanctuary in the attic of one of the abandoned houses.  It wasn’t bad, but you really didn’t get the sense that they were up there that long.  The other hint of that was the fact that we see Sheriff Eben’s beard has grown a little scraggly and if it weren’t for that, the film makes it look like they had gotten bored with waiting in the attic.  They had placed some text in the bottom of the screen that read, “one week later,” or something to that extent, but it still was a bit of a slowdown during the flick.  It’s just one minor complaint that really doesn’t bother me and really doesn’t deter from enjoying this film.

The cast was great, all pulling out believable performances, especially from Ben Foster.  Just about every movie I’ve seen him in I’ve appreciated, as I think he’s got a prodigious career ahead of him.  I had a hard time accepting Josh Hartnett as a sheriff of a small town, thinking he looked too young to be head of a borough, but I grew to accept it as the film went on.  David Slade, as a director, did a phenomenal job with this unique vampire tale, making this film a cut above the rest.

I’ll stop here, for fear of being tempted to give too much more away, and leave you with my final “bit” of 30 Days of Night.

Besides the praise I’ve just given this film in the paragraphs above, I’ll say this.  Whenever I run into anybody, anywhere, who even try to cite any of the Twilight films as a novel look at vampire mythologies, I quickly fire back with, “You want a quintessential vampire movie?  Watch 30 Days of Night!  The best I’ve seen in a long time!”  And I walk away, triumphant.

So that’s another film down in the Cinema Bits library of reviews…thanks for reading and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Poltergeist

As I’ve posted quite often here on Cinema Bits, I’ve mentioned that I’m a self-decreed horror movie devotee.  I love most areas of horror films and will try to watch whatever level of the genre at least once.  As they get more and more extreme, to shock and disgust, I’ll at least try to view it and see reason to continue doing so.  See, if there’s no point to what’s being shown on the screen, I’ll just shut it off and look for something else to watch.  Horror movies are about scaring you and putting a sense of dread in you, it really shouldn’t be about grossing you out or making you sick to your stomach.  So, with that said, I can enjoy many subgenres of horror.

One section of horror that needs to be perfectly executed, for me to appreciate, is the haunted variety.  So many films miss that mark, in my opinion, and I find it tough to seek out a good film to revel in.  I really didn’t think Insidious was all that great and I thought The Conjuring was a little bit better, but both those films aren’t—nor will they ever be—in my home media library.  Although, there have been some classics that I’ll watch repeatedly and have a great time with, like The Shining, 1408, Stir of Echoes, the Paranormal Activity films, and…Poltergeist.

The year 1982 gave us a couple of great movies that had a common denominator of Steven Spielberg—and it was probably more than just that—as he gave us his great family film, E.T.: The Extraterrestrial, and the modern take on haunted house films, Poltergeist.  But there has been some controversy regarding these two films and the involvement Spielberg had in their creation.  See, if you glance at his bio on IMDb.com during 1982, you’ll notice that he is credited as director of one and producer of the other.  However, some of the cast and crew of both films have gone on the record saying that he took on the directing tasks of both films, even though Tobe Hooper is solely credited as the director of Poltergeist.

One of the reasons this has been discussed time and time again is because, I’ve heard, it was a director’s guild issue that he wasn’t allowed to helm two films simultaneously.  I’ve also heard that it was probably a stipulation in Spielberg’s contract with Universal Studios while doing E.T. that he wasn’t allowed to work on anything else while working on their production.  Whatever the case, I never really thought about it one way or the other and I’m sure most people will feel the same.  But as a fan of film, I like to take note of certain vivacities and motifs of movies, observing signature charms some have over others.  And that’s one thing you can say about Spielberg’s films, is that they always have this certain panache you can discern from other films of the same type.  On top of that, Tobe Hooper has a particular way about filmmaking as well, and you really don’t see much of his style in this flick.  Nevertheless, it is what it is and regardless of who’d directed it, I love Poltergeist.

Steven Freeling (Craig T. Nelson), a successful real estate agent, and his family live in the new suburbs of Cuesta Verde.  One night, his daughter, Carol Anne (Heather O’Rourke), walks over to the family television while everyone is asleep—including Steven as he’s passed out on the recliner.  As the white noise is on after the television station goes off the air, she kneels down in front of the TV set and has a one-sided

conversation with something unseen in the screen.  After she does this a second time—this time in the parents’ bedroom—some entity within the television reaches out and causes the house to shake, waking up the Freelings.  It’s at that point that Carol Anne states the all-too-famous line, “They’re heee-ere.”  Soon after, Steven’s wife, Diane (JoBeth Williams), discovers strange goings-on within the house (things moving on their own and able to slide Carol Anne across the kitchen floor).  Later, as a storm passes over the neighborhood, the old tree in family’s backyard comes to life and reaches into the kids’ bedroom, taking Robbie (Oliver Robbins) as Carol Anne is left by herself in the house while the rest of the family is outside trying to save Robbie from the tree.  While alone in the bedroom, the closet turns out to be the portal to another dimension as it takes Carol Anne, leaving the Freelings to figure out how to get her back.

Poltergeist is such a great movie and has such memorable scenes that still scare me to this day.  I actually remember seeing this movie when it was released in theaters back then (I was around 13, going on 14) and thought it was disturbing, yet fun.  Whenever popping in this disc to watch the movie, it brings me back to my early teenage years and how I really wasn’t a man yet, because this film reduced me to a little boy, every time.  To this day, I still cringe during some of the film.

The film has its share of family fun, as we see the modern take (at the time) of parenting, and how the Freelings deal with a teenaged daughter as well as a couple of preadolescent children.  I was amazed, as a teenager, to see the parents smoking pot in their bedroom and nearly getting caught by their son as he walks in on them when they’re getting kind of frisky.  But still, you see how caring they are, particularly with the scene when Steven talks to Robbie about the thunderstorm.  I still use the same method to this day to determine if thunder is coming closer or going away.  Yes, the family dynamics displayed in this film is part of what makes this movie great—as well as giving it away that Spielberg had a heavy hand in the film’s direction, as familial undercurrents is a signature subject matter in his films.

Along those lines, what really grabs most of us who see Poltergeist is connecting to the fears instilled in all of us.  I’d mentioned the thunderstorms—which most of us as young children were afraid of—but I’m sure we can all relate to the massive shadow at the window of the big tree in their backyard or the clown doll that sits on Robbie’s chair in the kids’ bedroom.  I know most of us who have seen this movie probably have thought to themselves, “Why doesn’t he just throw that thing away or give it to Goodwill?”  The thing is, these items don’t scare us during the day—which would be the time to toss the doll—they only frighten us at night, which the filmmakers display brilliantly in this movie.

The special effects in this film are what really made it stand out from most other haunted house films (at the time).  All practically done, in very innovative ways, a lot of it adds to the dread and tone of the scenes it’s featured in.  The growing hallway scene is pretty intense and conjures up dreams most of us have had in where we’re trying to get somewhere in a hurry, only to never reach it.  Yes, the crazy bedroom, with all the toys and items floating and spinning around was shocking at the time, and the ghost creatures/monsters were pretty terrifying too.  But the one scene I think everyone recalls is the scene in where the member of the paranormal team, Marty (Martin Casella), goes to the kitchen to get something to eat.  After seeing a crawling and exploding steak, as well as spitting out a maggot infested leg of chicken, he goes to the washroom to clean out his mouth and face.  The light suddenly grows extremely bright and he notices a lesion on his face.  He begins picking at it, peeling skin off his face, more and more until his head is a gory mess of a skull, then suddenly there’s a flash and he’s back to normal.  That scene, above all else, was so disturbing to me back then and still presents a shock today…it’s definitely a highlight to see.

The music in Poltergeist is wonderfully composed and fits perfectly into each scene.  It’s not overly forced in or obvious in any way, nor is it excessive or sticking out in any scene.  It knows when to add to the scares and knows when to make you—as well as the characters—feel good.  Jerry Goldsmith is probably a name you recognize—maybe not—but I really love the compositions he’s contributed in most films I’ve heard.  He’s composed music in over 200 films and television series…a very impressive career, up until his death in 2004.

So, what’s my final “bit” on Poltergeist?

The movie is awesome, a spectacular spectacle that is one of my all-time favorite haunted house films.  The

 cast is wonderful, the story is great, the sets are superb…I just love this movie all around.  Besides the somewhat dated special effects—which you can’t fault since it really wasn’t perfected Hollywood-wide at that point—there’s nothing wrong with this film.  If it really was a Tobe Hooper joint, it’s the best movie he’s ever directed; if it’s what it really seems to be—a Spielberg picture—it’s definitely the best horror movie he’s done.  Either way, whether it’s ever put on record who directed it, the film is fantastic.

Here’s a post “bit”: something I like to do occasionally is to search out the address of the house and check it out on Google Earth’s Street View.  It still looks the same!  See for yourself: 4267 Roxbury Drive, Simi Valley, CA.  The house looks exactly the same as it did in the movie…enjoy!

Well, that’s it for today’s post…thanks for reading…and I welcome any comments!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

The Howling

During the month of October, I have many go-to DVDs and Blu-Rays that I make sure to watch.  I really don’t know why these films seem more entertaining now than if I decide to view them in, let’s say, the spring.  Maybe it’s the time change, where this month is the period when the nights come sooner, darkening the skies around five or so.  Perhaps it’s just a subconscious thing that makes me want to see these types of flicks.  Possibly, what makes the most sense is comparing it to watching Christmas movies.  You don’t usually want to see a Christmas movie in July, do you?  So the same can be said about movies that take place during the fall.  I guess it’s just a given that October is the month to see horror movies and that’s why this is my favorite time of the year.

I’ve mentioned it a few times over the course of my reviews that I keep all my home media—DVDs and Blu-Rays—in binders, being able to gather more movies that way rather than keeping them in their cases and taking up too much room on my bookshelf.  I’ve also probably beat the dead horse by explaining it time and time again that horror films from the 1980s are the ones that I prefer to watch.  So when October comes around, it becomes a perfect storm for my movie-watching.

But out of all the discs I go through, I sometimes have a difficult time in trying to pick something out.  Am I in the mood for zombies?  How about vampires?  Old time classics?  Do I go with the tried and true slashers?  Sometimes, I’m standing in front of the bookshelf, leafing through my binders for minutes at a time before I settle on a title.  But if I ever get a hankering for a werewolf movie, there are usually two films I flip a coin on.  Sometimes I go with the John Landis classic, An American Werewolf in London.  But other times, like this instance, I go with The Howling.

Recently, Scream! Factory (the subsidiary tier of Shout! Factory) had released this film on Blu-Ray, giving it a fantastic treatment with terrific clarity and awesome sound.  My DVD was becoming worn out, the look and sound becoming very apparent that is wasn’t up to snuff with the advent of HDTVs and surround sound, so when Scream! Factory announced they were going to release a Blu-Ray version of The Howling, I pre-ordered it as soon as I could.  As I had already collected quite a few titles from them—which isn’t hard to do since they seem to be releasing all my favorites, especially quite a few movies that have been out-of-print or never released on home media—the disc was happily added to my growing collection.

Without further ado, here’s the breakdown to director Joe Dante’s 1981 classic, The Howling…

Television news anchor, Karen White (Dee Wallace), is traumatized after being involved in the death

of a serial killer, Eddie Quist (Robert Picardo), whom she had helped police track down and kill.  Her therapist, Dr. Waggner (Patrick Macnee), advises Karen to take time off and suggests she go to a retreat, called The Colony, to recuperate.  Along with her husband, Bill (Christopher Stone), Karen travels to The Colony for some rest and relaxation, being welcomed by all the other residents of the haven.  Soon, however, she realizes that the people there are all werewolves.

The Howling is definitely a nostalgic piece that many people today, especially the younger crowd that is used to seeing CGI in all aspects of a film, would scoff at the pacing.  It certainly takes its time and doesn’t show too much in the man-to-werewolf transformation department.  But that’s how films were back then, giving us a sense of tension by implying dread and bad things to come.  Character development is sadly lacking in today’s horror movies, but it’s here in this film which helps the story out intricately.

Dee Wallace certainly solidifies herself as one of the best scream queens of the 80s in this film as this is where she really started it all.  Though she’s had bit parts in numerous television shows and a few movies throughout the 70s, The Howling was her first starring role that made her a household name and a face of the 80s.  It’s nice to watch her in this film and see how she became a go-to actress for quite a few horror films in the 80s and 90s, even still acting in some of the best ones today.  She’s terrific in this one and I can’t see anyone else in the part.

All in all, the actors and actresses in this film pull off some excellent and believable performances, but it helps when you have some of the best direction from Joe Dante himself.  He definitely has a style in his films that you can distinguish while watching.  After watching The Howling, take a look at some of his other films he followed this with, like his segment on Twilight Zone: The Movie, Gremlins, and The ‘Burbs, and you’ll certainly notice his style of direction.  There’s always a quirkiness to his films and you’ll find yourself enjoying them a lot more because of the dark humor inflicted throughout each one.

Now, I’d mentioned before how I usually have to decide between An American Werewolf in London andThe Howling, and it turns out both movies have a lot in common.  First off, Rick Baker was actually tied to doing the makeup effects for this film before taking on the duties in the John Landis film.  In his departure, the responsibilities were handed to Baker’s assistant, Rob Bottin.  So, between the years of 1981 and 1982, there were two werewolf films made that included two makeup artists of the same caliber doing the transformation effects.  The results?  Both films were noted for having a standout werewolf transformation that had never been seen before (at that time).  Most everyone (horror movie fans anyway) are familiar with the transformation scene in An American Werewolf in London, but not too many people remember the part in The Howling where the character of Eddie Quist turns into a werewolf.  Although by today’s standards, it might be a little slow and exhaustive, but it really showcased some originality and creativity by Bottin.  What I liked about his strategy of the transformation and the subsequent monster design was that it seemed surreal and was perfect for a crazy movie like this one.

Okay, so there’s one scene that stands out as looking a little cartoonish—literally—and that’s the sex scene between the characters of Bill and Marsha (Elisabeth Brooks).  At first, their transformations were the norm, showing their faces contorting a bit and teeth beginning to grow, but it ends with a wide shot of them turning into werewolves before panning up and away from them.  The thing about that last cut was that it was decided upon to represent it with animation.  Since the scene was very quick, it can be forgiven, but it’s still there and very evident.  I guess we can all view it as a precursor to CGI, looking at it as Joe Dante being ahead of his time, so that’s that. 

Now, my final “bit” on The Howlingis that it’s a classic and cult favorite that you should see if you call yourself a horror movie fan.  The film is definitely an 80s movie, but it doesn’t throw in all kinds of clichés and styles of that era.  You can definitely see this as a timeless flick that doesn’t get bogged down with devices and subtleties of the year this was filmed…well, maybe a little.  But this movie should not be missed during this time of the year.

Thanks for reading and Happy Halloween!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

The Funhouse

A lot of dynamics will always factor into my choice of selecting a title of a movie that I’ve never seen before.  When I get the hankering to see something that’s been on my radar or to pursue something and give it a try, my first go-to reference is usually to visit the Netflix web site and opt to do a search.  With the help of choosing certain gauges, like specific genres and subgenres, I habitually select “horror” and “slashers,” taking pleasure in looking through the long list the site gives me.

Every time I go through that ritual, there’re always a few titles that I’ll notice, making a mental note to go back and study the synopsis the next time I see it.  One such title that I’d noticed many times but never decided on adding it to my queue was a film called The Funhouse.  The cover art that Netflix presented was a close-up face of an evil-looking clown, leering and looking anything but happy.  For some reason I’d always passed on it, never adding it to my list but always seeing it as one of the many films during my searches (coincidentally, that clown has nothing to do with the film…in fact, I don’t think a clown is even seen in it).

Finally, the day had arrived when I stopped and decided to read up on the details of the film, subsequently kicking myself when I saw how much the film fell into my sought-after requirements.  Right off the bat, the first thing that stuck out—besides the fact that the film was of the horror variety—was that it was released in 1981.  Next, I’d noticed that the film was a Universal Studios release and that furthered my excitement.  Added to that information, the film was directed by Tobe Hooper of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre fame and that sealed the deal.

At the time, the average star rating for the movie on the Netflix web site was just a shade under three and for a horror movie, that’s pretty good.  So, wanting to see if I found another lost or forgotten (by me) treasure, I clicked on the “add” button and moved The Funhouse to the top of my queue.  After sending back the present disc I had at my house, I waited a few days, received the newly added disc in the mail, and popped in the Blu-Ray player to give it a looksee.

The film is about a teenaged girl, Amy (Elizabeth Berridge), who goes out with her boyfriend, Buzz

(Cooper Huckabee), her friend, Liz (Largo Woodruff), and Liz’s boyfriend, Richie (Miles Chapin), to the local town’s carnival.  As the fair closes and the patrons are starting to leave, Richie comes up with the idea to stay the night inside the funhouse—a horror-themed ride—so they sneak inside to settle for the night.  While inside the ride, the kids witness a murder by a man in a Frankenstein’s Monster mask (Wayne Doba) and decide to leave.  However, they find themselves trapped inside the locked ride as the carnival’s barker, Conrad Straker (Kevin Conway), discovers that the kids are somewhere in the building.  Turns out, the masked man is the barker’s adopted son, Gunther, and he has good reason to wear the mask.  Knowing that the kids probably witnessed the murder and are responsible for money that happens to be missing from Straker’s cash box, he has no intention of letting them leave alive.

I had really liked this movie when I first saw it a few years back, and like even more now, wondering where it had been all these years and why I’d never heard the film discussed during horror movie conversations on web sites or podcasts.  You’d figure that Tobe Hooper, renowned for changing the face of horror way back in 1974, would have his whole catalog of films discoursed when his name would be brought up, but not The Funhouse.  Now I’m sure certain circles of the horror community do, in fact, bring this film to light when chatting up all things Hooper, I’m just saying it had never hit myeardrums.  Usually you hear long dissertations about The Texas Chainsaw Massacre—and I have to admit, I can listen to all those symposiums for hours on end—and the controversial examinations about who directed Poltergeist, but The Funhouse either went over my head or just wasn’t talked about.  All I’ve got to say about that is, what a shame.

Though the opening of the film is a blatant rip-off of 1978’s Halloween, at the same time it sort of parodies the shot by making it into a little “gotcha” to the audience, making us think it was something it wasn’t.  Whatever the case, the cinematography was wonderfully done and really had the same atmosphere as the aforementioned classic, making me wonder if Tobe Hooper had hired the same cinematographer who’d worked on John Carpenter’s film.  Whoever it was, they knew how to light and film a scene to give it that style that we’ve only seen in the 1980s.  Add to that, with Hooper’s direction, you have a great film to see during the Halloween season.

The acting is definitely subpar, seeming like the studio hired kids right off the street, but that’s the definition of an 80s horror movie.  The slashers from this time were not known for any type of Academy award winning performances, just some kids that say their lines as best as they can and a survivor girl who screams her head off.  That, right there, was entertainment for my generation.

The film definitely has a slow burn to the plot, but it’s the atmosphere of dread—especially when the kids are stuck in the rickety housing area of the ride—that you can feel when watching this.  Most of the film takes place in the dark and gets you going as you can imagine how creeped out you’d be if you were stuck inside an amusement park ride with mechanical characters staying eerily still in the shadows.  All the parts that feature those scenes make you think that one of those crazy-looking mannequins is going to suddenly come to life and jump out at you.  Overall, once this film gets going, it’s pretty scary and is quite enjoyable to watch.

So, my final “bit” on The Funhouse?

Let me tell you…I took one look at this movie and knew I had to own this on home media.  As with a lot of my Blu-Ray discs, I purchased one of the Scream! Factory editions and love it wholeheartedly.  The movie is a forgotten 80s classic that needs to be seen, if you haven’t already.  It’s perfectly ripe for this time of year so do yourself a favor and go out to find this gem.

That’s it for now…thanks for reading and have a Happy Halloween!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers

Well, after John Carpenter tried to veer away from the story of Michael Myers by making part three a standalone movie about a novelty company set out to kill children on Halloween with masks that are triggered to murder all who wear them (yeah, I know, it was a silly premise with some really far-fetched ideas that needed the audience to do more than suspend disbelief and actually turn off their brain—but I have a soft spot for that movie, so I won’t drag it through the mud at all), a decision was made to go back to basics and bring back everybody’s favorite masked killer. 

Since part three upset a lot of fans of the budding Halloween franchise, the consensus was that they wanted Michael Myers back to continue his violent pillaging in Haddonfield.  Did they care that he obviously burned to death at the end of part two?  I mean, the credits were rolling for quite a few minutes with his body lying in front of us on fire.  No one could have survived that.

But Moustapha Akkad (executive producer of every single Halloweenmovie until his death in 2005) listened and he made sure to satisfy the devotees of the first two films by having the horror icon of Michael Myers resurrected for the next sequel.  Though it took six years to do so, fans finally rejoiced in 1988 when Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers was released to theaters.

I honestly can’t remember if I had gone to see this movie when it was released.  I’m pretty sure I had, but then again, I’d partook in a lot of pot-smoking back then so my long-term memory is a little less than perfect.  However, I do remember thinking about how awesome it was that the filmmakers brought back Michael Myers to do what he did best, believing full well that it was probably a pissing contest with theFriday the 13^th franchise—they had Jason on that side, so Halloweenneeded to bring back Michael on theirs.

I’ll say this: if you can forget what was obvious at the end of part two, you can see this film as one hell of a story that had some great ideas and was pretty frightening.  Though Jamie Lee Curtis was missing from the story, the explanation of her character’s absence is believable and wasn’t a disadvantage in getting into the plot.  In no way does it hold a candle to carpenter’s 1978 masterpiece, but it does have its merits.

Directed by Dwight H. Little, who’d only had a couple of forgettable movies in his résumé at the time, he understood what needed to be done and gave us a worthy sequel in the franchise.

It’s been ten years since the explosion at the hospital left Michael Myers (George P. Wilbur) in a coma, remaining as a patient at the medical ward of Richmond Mental Institution.  But when being

transferred to Smith’s Grove, he somehow hears the medics saying that he has a niece, Jamie Lloyd (Danielle Harris), and awakens from his catatonia.  When word gets to Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence), who is badly scarred after surviving the blast at the hospital all those years ago, he goes after the ambulance that took Michael away.  After finding the vehicle halfway submerged in a river and seeing the bloodied bodies left behind, Loomis knows where Michael is headed and who he’s going after.

First and foremost, the biggest problem I have with this movie (not to mention the two sequels that follow) is the mask Michael Myers wears.  It looks so different than the one used in the first two films and that has always bothered me each and every time I re-watch this film.  I’ve heard stories about how the mask was given away and another that said the mask was too messed up to reuse for this film.  I’ve even heard that the hair on the mask became bleached over time and looked blond, so they didn’t think it would look good on film.  Actually, I believe that last story because of a scene that you can see in this movie.  It’s near the end, when Loomis is in the school with Jamie as Michael comes out and attacks him.  In that quick cut of a scene (you may have to put the player in slow motion or go frame-by-frame), you can see that Michael Myers is wearing the correct mask and, sure enough, the hair looks blond…almost white in color.  But if they had the mask, couldn’t they have colored the hair?  Or maybe recreate it perfectly since they had the original mask they can go by?  I guess you can tell that this has bothered me for a long time.  But you get used to the mask as the movie goes along, so let’s move on, shall we?

Secondly, the guy who plays Michael did an okay job at his portrayal—I can’t knock him for that—but his body type was a little off for the part.  He appeared to be wearing shoulder pads and just had an awkward appearance…it was just hard to believe this was the same Michael that was going after Laurie Strode some years before.

Overall, the scenes featured in the film, where Michael is going after victims, stalking them or just outright killing them, are great.  You have some really scary parts where you really don’t know what to expect.  Although some sections of the film don’t seem to make sense (suddenly all the trick-or-treaters disappear and leave the streets deserted as Jamie is wandering the streets alone) or are left unexplained (when it’s discovered Michael was able to kill every single cop in the Haddonfield precinct), the movie as a whole is fun and follows the slasher formula nicely.  Although it’s more of the same thing as what the two original films gave us, it’s entertaining to have Michael back and remaining in theHalloween franchise for good.

My final “bit” on Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers?

As a whole, the film is your typical 1980s slasher, yet an above average sequel in the franchise. 

Pleasence really starts to go over the top in this one, but is surrounded by some good performances, especially by the ten-year-old Danielle Harris.  If you can get by the odd look of Michael Myers, you’ll find this outing exceptionally well done.

Thanks for reading and Happy Halloween!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

Daybreakers

You know those vampire movies, where the hero has to kill off the head baddie so that the world doesn’t get overrun—as well as mankind becoming extinct—by bloodsuckers?  Well, meet the movie that takes place after all that happens and when the hero doesn’t turn things around.  2010’s Daybreakers is the “what if?” film that takes place well after humans are defeated by vampires.  In fact, it’s a futuristic film that shows us how we become the minority and the prey for those predators.

When the trailer showed itself before some movie I had seen sometime in 2009 (I can’t remember which…nor can I remember if it was in a theater or on a DVD rental), I just thought it was your run-of-the-mill vampire flick.  But my ears pricked up when I saw that the story takes place in the future, after vampires have taken over the world and have become the dominant species, making humans their primary source of food.  I saw the science fiction aspect of the story, right away, in that trailer and that was unique to me.  Then, I noticed some well-known actors were featured in the film—Sam Neill, Ethan Hawke and Willem Dafoe to name a few—and took that as a good sign that this might be something worth seeing.  But, alas, the movie came and went without me bothering to check it out.  In the back of mind, however, I figured I’d catch it on home media and that’s exactly what I had done a mere five or six months later.

The film takes place ten years in the future, with the majority of the world’s population being vampires.  Humans are only a small minority in the world, which presents a problem for the vampires

as their food supply (human blood) is diminishing.  Dr. Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), a lead hematologist—and a vampire—for Bromley Marks Corporation, a large pharmaceutical company, has been helping the company look for a way to produce a synthetic blood to sustain the population.  By chance, Dalton runs into a group of humans and helps them get away from the local authorities, obviously sympathetic to them as he lies to the vampire cops when they show up.  Later, the leader of that group of humans, Audrey (Claudia Karvan), shows up at Dalton’s home and tells him they know of a cure for vampirism, giving him a map to a meeting location.  There, he meets Lionel “Elvis” Cormac (Willem Dafoe) and he explains to Dalton how he used to be a vampire, but due to a freak accident, he was cured and is now human again.  Dalton then decides to work with the humans to try and duplicate what happened to Elvis so that a cure can be developed.

I like how the filmmakers—the writing and directing duo of Michael and Peter Spierig—went against the grain of vampire movies by showing their species as a majority of the Earth’s population.  Typically, the vampires, in film, are shown as a miniscule group of beings that a human hero will go after and eventually destroy.  The vampire is always shown as the evil entity that automatically kills humans and shows no sympathy in doing so.  In Daybreakers, we still have characters like that, but then there are some—like Ethan Hawke’s character—who show compassion and choose not to kill humans.

Also, another aspect of the film that interested me is the added mutation the vampires are threatened with due to the lack of human blood.  It’s not just a case where they are going hungry and dying off, but instead are turning into demon-like creatures that are feral in nature and need to be killed off by the remaining authoritative vampire figures.  With that added to the mix of the plot, Hawke’s character is even more abstruse in his place concerning his own kind and the humans as he’s stuck between his empathy for their cause and the threat of being mutated into some regressive monster.

The look of the film is so clean and crisp, with a very futuristic look to it, but not to the point where we have flying cars and overindulgent gadgets doing everything for us.  The Spierig brothers really know how to set up their shots, giving us the differentiating worlds of both the vampires and humans.  Of course, since the vampires need to live their lives without the sun, most of their scenes were filmed at night and the Spierigs really give us a cold feeling as well with those shots.  Also, the ideas that they come up with to help the vampires live in their day-to-day lives are kind of neat.  The cars, for one, and the technology used on them were really cool—the use of video when the darkened shields were instituted was very impressive.

Ethan Hawke as the lead character had the right chops to pull off the role.  I’ve always thought he was good at pulling off characters that show empathy towards others and he doesn’t fail here.  Most times, however, Hawke plays the good guy in his films so it was a no-brainer to cast him in this role.  But I have seen Hawke in some good antagonistic roles that he’d pulled off just as well. 

Willem Dafoe was a little goofy in this film…I don’t know…I guess I see him as the Green Goblin now, so I my evaluation of his role is a little unfair.  It might’ve been the southern drawl he was putting on or just that he was playing the part a little too flippantly.

It’s nice to see Sam Neill—who plays the evil pharmaceutical company CEO, Charles Bromley—back in an evil role.  I’ve always been a little frightened of him after seeing him for the first time in Omen III: The Final Conflict way back in 1981 (I was twelve at the time), so I thought he was right for the part.

Any time you’re going to have a horror movie out there these days, you’re going to have to pull off

some top notch special effects.  In that regard, this film doesn’t hold back.  One of the first effects actually made me jump a little when I first saw it.  It was the testing of the substitute blood on a vampire that seemed to be going bad, then calmed down…before suddenly making the test subject explode in a burst of blood and brains.  The design of the mutated vampires was done pretty well and gave me a jolt once more in another scene.  The Spierigs definitely did their homework and gave us a good show when it came to the effects shots within this film.

So, what’s my final “bit” on Daybreakers?

Just when I was getting sick of vampire movies, the team of Michael and Peter Spierig give us something fresh and new here.  They didn’t feel the need to give us an origin story on how the world had gotten to be this way, because with every movie that’s been done so far, we know.  Daybreakers is pretty solid all the way through, yet there are still a few lulls here and there.  But I enjoyed it thoroughly and recommend this film to anyone who enjoys vampire movies and sci-fi flicks—the genres were meshed together pretty well in this one.

Thanks for reading and Happy Halloween!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.

The Monster Squad

Today’s entry is an odd one of sorts—not because of the film itself but because of my discovery of it—and the reason for its oddity is that I hadn’t heard of it until maybe a few years ago.  But I’m glad I’d come across this film as it falls under the luck I’ve had with finding retro movies that I happen to encounter and end up appreciating.  I actually love it when I decide to finally see a film that I’ve heard good things about and end up praising it myself.  Such is the case with 1987’s The Monster Squad, written and directed by Fred Dekker and co-written by Shane Black.

In the last few years, I must’ve heard people talk about this film incessantly, quoting certain scenes and claiming how much of a classic it was.  But I was lost in the conversation, not knowing what they were talking about and just thinking it must be a bad movie for me not to have heard about it.  One of the reasons it was probably discussed lately was that the film celebrated its 25^th anniversary back in 2012.  However, that bit of discovery didn’t do much to help me remember this film and I realized this was yet another film that had escaped my radar in the 80s.

Well, it didn’t take much for me to place the disc on my Netflix queue and wait for it to arrive in my mailbox a meager two days later.  Shortly after pressing “play” on my remote, I was into this movie and silently scolded myself for never hearing of it.

Let me give you a short synopsis of the film.

Sean (Andre Gower) and his friends—Patrick (Robby Kiger), Horace (Brent Chalem), and Eugene

(Michael Faustino)—are into the classic monsters of horror films, forming a club to talk about them in and out of school.  When Dracula (Duncan Regehr)—along with The Wolf Man (Carl Thibault), The Gill Man (Tom Woodruff, Jr.), The Mummy (Michael MacKay), and Frankenstein’s Monster (Tom Noonan)—arrive in the kids’ small town, Sean and his friends—along with local cool kid, Rudy (Ryan Lambert), and Sean’s little sister, Phoebe (Ashley Bank)—jump into action to stop Dracula’s plans.

First off, being a big Universal Studios fan, I love the inclusion of the classic monsters in this movie.  I’m amazed how this film was able to get the rights or permission to feature these characters, being thatThe Monster Squad was not a Universal joint but a TriStar Pictures film.  I’ve heard a few anecdotes about how Universal allowed the famous monsters to be in the movie as long as their appearances are altered and not to look exactly like the originals.  Whatever the case, this movie is great just for the fact that the famous characters are in it.

As for the framework of the film, most people will notice right away that the whole structure is worked in the same basis of The Goonies.  The arrangement of having a group of preteens forming a group or club to have adventures usually works if done right.  Not only has The Goonies been successful with this concept, but also Stand By Me, E.T., even 2011’s Super 8.  There’s something about a film that puts the adults in the background with the kids as the main protagonists that just succeeds perfectly…when done right.  With those movies, and especially The Monster Squad, one can feel like a kid again when watching this film.

I’d call this a family film, but the film does boast a few bad words and at one point refers to a (wolf) man’s testicles.  But if you’re okay with that and want to introduce your children to a mild horror film that familiarizes these classic monsters while having fun with it, then The Monster Squad is a perfect starter.

Like I’d mentioned, in order for this film to have these monsters in the film, their appearances had to be modified.  Whether that’s true or not, the famous monsters look a bit different and are not exactly how you’d remembered them.  Dracula is more or less what Universal gave us back in the 30s with the notorious vampire dressed in black and sporting a cape, but the Transylvanian accent is not present.  The Gill-Man whom we all know from the Creature From the Black Lagoon film looks a bit more streamlined in its design and not as clunky as its 1954 predecessor.  The Mummy looks like the traditional monster we’ve seen over the years after the original Boris Karloff model where we just see someone wrapped in bandages.  Probably the most different in appearance is Frankenstein’s Monster as the character’s design accentuated the actor playing the creature rather than trying to duplicate the famous Karloff look.  Finally, the Wolfman’s design is a bit special as, with all of the monster designs, the late Stan Winston created it.  But the thing about the Wolfman in this film, and you’ll notice when watching this movie, Winston based the facial features on his own.

Not only did Fred Dekker direct this cult classic well, but it really helped that he had the writing assistance of Shane Black.  If you go back into Black’s résumé of writing credits, you’ll see that he’s had a hand in some good action films over the years.  He’s responsible for theLethal Weapon series and, most recently, wrote and directed Iron Man 3.  Also, he’s probably best remembered as the geeky soldier, Hawkins, in Predator.  But Black really penned a memorable film with The Monster Squad that should go down as a classic in the family horror film genre.

Yes, Dekker should be praised for his efforts in The Monster Squad.  For me to be able to pick up this 25-year-old movie and enjoy it as much as I had, that shows how timeless he’d made it.  So many times I decide to watch a film from the 80s that I’d missed when first released, only to laugh at it or just flat out hate it.  It’s funny, though, because Fred Dekker has only directed four films in his career, two of which I’m featuring this month.  Maybe it’s his choice, but I would’ve thought he’d have a pretty lucrative career by now with a lot more directing gigs under his belt.  One thing, after watching The Monster Squad, he definitely has a way with directing the children in this movie which sort of has a Steven Spielberg vibe to it.  He made this fun for me and I’m sure anyone, of any age, will enjoy this.

One last thing…if there’s anything that tells you that this is an 80s movie, it’s the music by Michael Sembello during a montage and the end credits.  You may recognize his name as Sembello had a hit in the 80s with “Maniac” from the Flashdance film.  But the song featured in this movie, “Rock Until You Drop,” is so 80s, you’ll most certainly take a mental trip back to those days (if you’re from my generation) and it’ll definitely make you smile. 

My final “bit” on The Monster Squad?

If you love movies like The Goonies,Little Monsters, or Super 8, you’ll love The Monster Squad.  It’s fun, adventurous, and safe for the whole family (I’d have no qualms about showing this to a younger audience).  If you want to see an exciting horror movie without any gore or excessive violence, this film shouldn’t be missed…especially during this Halloween season.

Thanks for reading a Happy Halloween!

Cinema Bits is on Twitter and Facebook.