Showing posts with label Sexy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sexy. Show all posts

Monday, October 15, 2012

31 Horrors: Sssssss (#8)

Wherein I attempt to watch 31 horror films over the course of October. 31 horror films that I have never seen before, from obscure to acclaimed classics. We'll see how well I go in actually finding the time to watch and then write about them in some way.

Let's ignore the, quite frankly, ridiculous title of this 1973 killer snake flick Sssssss (also known as Ssssnake in the UK), and move on to the fact that, ya know, it's actually kinda good!


The film begins with a warning label slash thank you card to the cast and crew, stating that the animals used in the making of Sssssss were not defanged and that the people involved in the production genuinely put their lives on the line to make it. "It" being a film that was one of the last films ever made specifically for a double feature - it played alongside The Boy Who Cried Werewolf - which is a nifty lil fact to know. As I watched it I actually thought the movie had the visual aesthetic of a TV movie. It was directed by Bernard L. Kowalski, whose previous film was indeed a TV one, and it shows, although he definitely amped it up with the lovely use of widescreen. Still, it has a pale wash over it that lacks a certain cinematic quality, and yet one that befits a film of this kind.

Anyway, I'm getting a bit sidetracked. I really enjoyed Sssssss! I had trepidations to watch it, after discovering it hidden amongst my flatmate's DVD collection, as snakes give me the willies. Oh sure, they're not quite as bad as, say, the spiders in Arachnophobia, but they're still creepy. There's a disturbing nature to the creatures, and seeing the flaky, scaly flesh of these reptiles meant I have no trouble believing the filmmakers' claims that they're the real deal is true and not some made up wannabe urban legend that they invented for notoriety sake.

Written by Hal Dresner and Daniel C. Striepeke, Sssssss does a good job of setting up the mechanics of a "killer snake" movie without merely relying on - oh, I dunno - a truck transporting a collection of deadly snakes overturning, unleashing the hissing horror upon a small town of unsuspecting victims. Strother Martin is quite deliciously sinister as snake expert Dr Carl Stoner and Dirk Benedict is also surprisingly fine as his milquetoast assistant/experiment subject. I particularly enjoyed Heather Menzies, too, whose Diane Keaton shag revealed a shoulda been scream queen (she also made Piranha, but that's about it as far as Menzies and genre fare go). Knowing she was one of the Von Trapp kids in The Sound of Music just adds to my fondness for her performance. She's especially impressive in the film's final 30 minutes.

And, look, can I mention this? Yes, of course I can. You've come to expect it, haven't you?




Yes, that Dirk Benedict was quite a good looking man back in the day. He wasn't cast as "the faceman" on The A-Team for his brain. That last shot is a from a skinny dipping scene that was presumably to feature more nudity that it eventually did. It's quite obvious throughout the scene that some particularly fake-looking foliage had been superimposed over the image of Benedict and Menzies' bare bottoms. Bless 'em. Shame though, amiright?

What I didn't expect from Sssssss, however, was that about half way in it would become a homage to Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho! In a turn of narrative events that had me guffawing (at 1.30am, mind you!), several nods to the masterful 1960 film become obvious. No more so, of course, than this film's own rendition of the famed shower scene that sees Strother Martin's character, initially a protagonist until his obvious evil deeds became known, enter the bathroom of a character and sets a black mamba snake into it behind the curtain. A flurry of edited reaction shots later and the Doctor takes back and snake and exits the bathroom, and the apartment, leaving the victim to collapse onto the bathroom floor, dead. Hello! It certainly helps that the victim is the incredibly good looking cult beefcake Reb Brown. What's that you say? Screencaps... oh sure!




















There's more, but none quite as overt as that shower scene. Even the music attempts to bring back memories of Hitch. It's a strange scene for sure, but one that made many innocuous moments thereafter look like sly references. Unrelated to Psycho, but there was even a scene with echoes of Saw a whole 30 years prior to that movie's inception!

So, yes, I was quite impressed with Sssssss. Despite its flaws (1970s transitional visual effects do not look good, you guys!), it ends up a rather effective chiller that doesn't necessarily play in to the regular tropes of the killer animal genre. I mean, how many movies do you know feature a final sequence where in a king cobra snake and a mongoose fight it out to the death before an ambiguous ending on the protagonist's fate? Not many I presume. B

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

31 Horrors: Chopping Mall (#7)

Wherein I attempt to watch 31 horror films over the course of October. 31 horror films that I have never seen before, from obscure to acclaimed classics. We'll see how well I go in actually finding the time to watch and then write about them in some way.

Dear readers, put on your jelly bracelets, and your cool graffiti coat! We're going to the mall and having fun is what it's all aboot [sic].

You guys, Chopping Mall is so much fun! I loved it. The 1986 robots-go-berserk-in-the-shopping-mall slasher flick is a total hoot and naturally all I'm doing now is listening to Robin Sparkles' "Let's Go to the Mall" on repeat as I google images of the super foxy (and supremely douchey) male cast. The men of 1980s horror flicks don't get enough recognition and I believe it's my (and Jason Adams of My New Plaid Pants, of course) job to rectify that.

"I'm gonna rock your body 'til Canada Day"


There's even a robot!!! Granted, not a robot with homicidal tendancies brought on by a freak thunderstorm after closing time, but a robot nonetheless. I like to imagine the writers of How I Met Your Mother were fans of Chopping Mall (nee Killbots) and wanted to make Sparkles' "minor hit" of 1992 an homage to this wacky flick. If anything, Chopping Mall proves that "Let's Go to the Mall" is a scarily accurate portrayal of '80s teen life. Chopping Mall does everything that Bait 3D didn't do recently and have total whackadoo fun with its thick-as-bricks plot. There's a proposed remake that, like so many "remakes" lately appears to merely be snatching a famous(?) title and rejiggering it with whatever the filmmakers wish. I'll stick with the original (I mean, what crazy way are they going to make mobile phones irrelevant to a new version?) and that episode of The OC where Ryan, Seth, Marissa, and Summer got trapped in the mall that one time.

Totes didn't have to even look up those character names from The OC. And I wonder why I'm single, ya know?

There's little more to Chopping Mall that I've already alluded to. Robots, previously designed to work as security for a modern, new age shopping mall, go haywire and start hunting down the people trapped inside. First the human security guards and then a janitor, followed very quickly by the eight teenage shop employees who were having a party in the furniture store. By "very quickly", I do mean very quickly. By the 35 minute mark it felt like the characters were gearing up for the big climax sequence. It goes by extremely fast, even for a film that's only 77 minutes long.

Jim Wynorski's film - Wynorski, by the way, who is now directing movies like Piranhaconda and spoofs called Cleavagefield - is actually surprisingly brutal. I figured it would be quite tame for some reason, but there are some quite violent deaths. There are electrocutions, throat slashings, laser wounds, explosions, plummeting elevators, head burstings, and even one poor gal getting set on fire! The "final girl" even leaps through a plate glass window at her own accord. The actor that gets her head blown off even gets the hilarious indignity of having her end credits screen grab be, er, well, this:


Are you not amazed?

The robots are quite ugly to look at, sort of with the appearance of a squashed penguin with its duck-bill laser shooter thingamajig and silly cardboard boxy exterior, plus the sound they make rather annoying. The dialogue, however, is thoroughly riotous with such ding dongs as "I guess I'm just not used to being chased around the mall by killer robots", and this delicious exchange between the virginal Kelli Maroney and Tony O'Dell: "Nice shot!" "My dad's a marine." And, really, that's just the beginning of Chopping Mall's, ahem, thrilling madcap fun. Oh, and can I just mention how glad I was my flatmate wasn't home during that pet store sequence? I was literally SCREAMING AND COVERING MY EYES! Neighbours could've heard me, I'm sure.

Of course, it wouldn't be an '80s slasher flick if it wasn't a lil bit of a flasher flick, too! While the hetero dudes in attendance got some pretty ladies to look at, and one - that'd be Barbara Crampton, I believe - that gets all tits outs for the boys kicks, it's the women (and, yes, the gay men) who get the prize picks. Four good looking guys, most of which are in a state of undress at some stage or other, acting mostly like sex-crazed teenage pigs and, ugh, kinda sexy. I have no idea who John Terlesky is, but can his 1986 self do some time travelling to right now and show up on my door step? His character is a total wanky douche, but who cares?





Shameless, I know, but what are you gonna do? Somebody needs to be out there screencapping 1980s horror for the male flesh as well, you know! I'd certainly never say no to Russell Todd either.


Chopping Mall! Your Fly Buys rewards card can't help you here! Can I watch it again now, please? B+

31 Horrors: Waxwork (#6)

Wherein I attempt to watch 31 horror films over the course of October. 31 horror films that I have never seen before, from obscure to acclaimed classics. We'll see how well I go in actually finding the time to watch and then write about them in some way.

Well, I guess it's horror?

Actually, "horror" is probably about third down the list of genres that this odd concoction could be placed in. I'd probably describe Anthony Hickox's 1988 film as a fantasy comedy before horror, but its reputation is quite strong and I'd always wanted to see it so I did and I'm not above saying is something horror for the purposes of October when it really, kinda isn't. That I didn't particularly enjoy it is another thing altogether, but I'm probably not going to bother with the second, Waxwork II: Lost in Time. At least not in October, anyway. Unless someone can give a good reason to do so? CAN YOU? Probably not, yeah?

Obviously riffing off of André de Toth's 1953 shlocker, House of Wax with Vincent Price, Hickox's Waxwork is a bizarre film that takes a more comical look at a mad wax sculptor's efforts to complete his macabre works. Filmed with garish, bright colours and with repeated use of the hideous "fish eye" lens (remember The King's Speech?), Waxwork has a unique look coming at it today, but I feel like this was definitely a style at the time. Am I wrong in remembering Peter Jackson's early horror work had the same same easthetic? As the core cast of teenagers find themselves in scary ("scary") situations involving famous horror identities (Count Dracula, the Wolfman, the Marquis de Sade, Romero zombies, the Mummy, and so on) it takes on the attitude of a somewhat self-referential film like Wes Craven's New Nightmare, but filtered through grand guignol bombastics.


I didn't find its sense of humour particularly funny, I must say. With its oddball personality placed very firmly left of centre, I think it takes a particular mood to get into it. I found the obvious low budget particularly distracting, which is disappointing. I hate discouraging filmmakers with limited resources from going out there and attempting stuff that is as boldly inventive with story and narrative as Hickox was with this, but I just don't think he was able to pull it off. The obvious use of model sets, human actors whose breathing is clearly visible, and some less than convincing make-up effects only served to pull me out of the experience that he so clearly had the faith in. And that's before the acting! The effort is certainly there with a number of the set-pieces - although an Egyptian Mummy sequence feels a bit like a piss-weak afterthought - but without the resources to truly pull it off at the level that they really needed. Its intentional hokeyness - at least what I saw as intentional - was off-putting, too, and I routinely find this device used in low budget fare as a way of nudging and winking its way out of a corner. No such luck.

Still, I did find myself occasionally being pulled in. I particularly liked the Dracula sequence featuring Michelle Johnson and Miles O'Keeffe, and when the film sticks to wide shots it impresses on a visual level. The initial wax set-ups are really quite novel. I got a kick out of the anachronistic use of Lesley Gore's "It's My Party" over the end credits, and any film that includes cast members from Gremlins (Zach Galligan), Valley Girl (Deborah Foreman), Twin Peaks (Dana Ashbrook), and The Lord of the Rings (John Rhys-Davis) will always have at least some eye-popping retroactive niche value to it. As a pre-date to a lot of the films that seem to get people in a twist today (anything that remotely winks at audiences with references they can easily "get" and feel proud about; playing with alternate ideas of reality) it's of interest, but it sadly doesn't really work outside of that. C

I will say this though. Whoever did the casting on this movie did a great job. Apart from the aforementioned Galligan, Foreman, Ashbrook and Johnson, there's fun supporting work by Michu Meszaros (the man inside the ALF costume!), David Warner, Jack David Walker, and some really fine casting for Dracula. If you're casting a sexually provocative figure and famed seducer for a youth-leaning horror film then you may as well go sexy and matinee, yeah? Miles O'Keeffe as Dracula is, shall we put it, a quite attractive specimen. He was essentially Angel before David Boreanaz was ever on the scene.


Yes please, I'll take two!




...

Hmmm... maybe just one.

(photos nabbed via 'Male Vamps' blog, naturally.)

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

31 Horrors: The Signal (#3)

Wherein I attempt to watch 31 horror films over the course of October. 31 horror films that I have never seen before, from obscure to acclaimed classics. We'll see how well I go in actually finding the time to watch and then write about them in some way.

I had heard a lot of great things about this late 2000s telecommunication horror flick. Told in triptych form, this film features three directors and has some nasty tricks up its sleeve. I had had the film sitting here to watch for a while now, but the recent festival viewing of the abhorrent V/H/S lessened my desire to see it based on the name of David Bruckner. I needn't have worried (as much) as The Signal has plenty of ideas to make for an entertaining films and, despite the multiple director set-up, it mostly all works as a cohesive whole.

Obviously taking some, if not large swathes of, inspiration from George Romero's The Crazies (curiously, the remake of that film would come out two years after the cinema release of The Signal... art imitating art imitating art?), the premise sees people turning into violent monsters after an unexplained signal across televisions, telephones, and radio alters their minds. It's a fun idea and one that M Night Shyamalan had attempted to play with in the laughable The Happening that same year. Obviously the film is a rather boutique take on the idea given it's budget of only $50,000, but the writing is clear enough that the message of our dependance on these gizmos and gadgets comes across succinctly and with the right about of entertaining zing.

I could have done without such an overtly comedic tone in the second act - it's almost trying to get Shaun of the Dead level guffaws out of the audience, but they don't quite materialise as frequently as I imagine they had anticipated - but I found the first segment a wonderfully scary piece of work, and the final act a genuinely touching piece of bloodied drama. I enjoyed the way stories were worked in to one another, how characters came and went as they would in every day circumstances, and I think they made the central relationship between Anessa Ramsey and Justin Welborn was a to-and-fro affair with constantly changing dynamics. I also thought that, given the budget, the filmmakers made great use of cinematography and art direction. It can be hard to make a film made on this little money look genuinely post-apocalyptic, but these three directors (well, two, given the middle one was predominantly set inside the one interior set) made it work.

Also, this:


The Signal? Small, but with enough tricks up its sleeve to count. B