Horror Holiday! (May Contain Spoilers)

[nopersonality]

The Writing's on the Wall


Fear Itself
Episode 2 - "Spooked"
(2008 / director: Brad Anderson)

★

Don't ya just love morally ambiguous horror? After so many years of Saw sequels featuring a limp-brained cancer patient spitting pretentious diatribes about wasted lives (how about the wasted hours of watching those movies- I only lost 3 and feel I should paid back for them), we get this really bullshit episode of Fear Itself milking only the most sacred cheese-cow for easy emotions and pathetic flashbacks invoking familial guilt to explain to us how our bad-cop anti-hero played by silver-fox dilf Eric Roberts had an internal struggle throughout his heartless beatings of suspects in interrogations to get them to talk. But we don't know this at first (though we can sure as hell see it coming). So, in the meantime: gee he's corrupt but his methods turn out to be in the interest of actually serving justice- putting us at odds. Yeah... that's bullshit. It's pointless "moral" mindfuckery which assumes we the audience only care about the images of cops beating suspects and their bruised, battered aftermath pictures to stir in us a little... I want to call it emotion, but I'm smarter than that. It's just imagery that we've come to expect from detective stories. This is followed up of course by the bad criminal character we see in an opening scene dying, becoming a ghost, and deciding to haunt detective Harry. So technically, our "bad cop" is being taught a lesson by another bad guy. Does that seem a little fishy to anyone else?

Okay, before we go any further, I admit I know all about and have taken to heart the message that it takes one to know one. But even then, that doesn't give license for one bad character to play superior for any reason. And you'd better believe that's exactly what happens here. Another thing I absolutely hate about cop-tv and shows like The Shield: this whole anti-hero revolution (The Sopranos, Rescue Me, etc; even to some extent those C.S.I. type shows). Guys who are annoying and do shitty things but, hey, at least they're honest and up front about it. Leading their fanbases to either go "that's badass" or to ramble pretentiously about how high minded and browed this approach to "drama" is. I'm not buying it. And better still, nobody has to care because I also admit I know it's a simple matter of just turning the dial on the tv. I don't have to watch these shows when I see them come up. However, when this sort of thing is lifted wholesale from the action / thriller drama genre and transplanted into horror, I take issue. I don't really want to police this kind of television- which is usually why I stick to horror, a typically art-driven genre. To say nothing of how this episode just doesn't even know how to handle this material the right way. The show's morality (and how little it even cares) is captured perfectly in the sequence where a fellow cop kinda confronts Harry (I say kinda because the other cop is acting like he doesn't give a shit- he just wants to irritate Harry, thereby irritating us), saying that Harry'd better hope the criminal guy lives or he'll have to pay for what he's done.

Us on the other hand, we are actually watching what's going on in the story: the sick fuck criminal kidnapped a child, wouldn't tell us where he was hiding the kid, and while he had to beat the information out of him, he was crying like a girl and begging for Harry not to hurt him. Takes some stones to do that. So, clearly the point of this set-up is to question or criticize the nature of vigilanteism but this cop is made into such an obvious, stiff cliche that it's just not going to open up any discussion or make the issue look complex. To give it a tiny bit of credit, this is easily more compelling than Saw (and any of its' sequels) ever was. But to take that credit back, Joel Schumacher dramas are more depthful and edge-of-your-seat than the Saw series. Anyone could top those shitfests. The show then chases this opener with a comic relief character ribbing Harry about being old. Oh, the fucking chuckles- I don't know how I'll restrain myself from pissing with laughter. I didn't realize that trying to engage the audience into thinking about a moral/ethical issue was considered such a huge downer. Yeah, his awful dialogue is not funny and the actor isn't given a chance to do anything unique to show off his own skills. Saddest thing about this black joker (other than the fact he says that word you KNOW makes me violent, "sweet," in describing anything but food or sex): he was once in a John Waters movie. Promise squandered.

The arrival of a sad and desperate but warm and friendly woman into the story who suspects her husband of cheating but needs evidence livens things up initially and actually seems to bring about some change in the Harry character (although Eric Roberts is so damn handsome and sexy that it's easy to just like him and possible to temporarily forget what's fucked up about his character). So, he heads off to set up surveillance on this job and of course we're going to need a "haunted house" for it. The place has some nice paintings on the wall and a hanging "creepy" doll. It reeks of cliche, like everything else here, but I can't really knock it. And when Harry in the house starts hearing conversations about pissing blood and girls whispering, I also can't fault this- it's good stuff. Watch the wall paintings as well. Sadly, just when I thought this woman was going to help the story along, she proves herself to be a character who won't evolve. In a scene where she pushes Harry to tell her what's bothering him about the job, the dialogue is so superficial and puke-warm that it's utterly cringe-worthy. Is that what fear is? Fear of having to sit through bad dramatic scenes? If so, bravo Mr. Anderson. During her whole speech, she doesn't look warm anymore. She just looks creepy and he looks like an idiot for swallowing her b.s. Literally, any minute now it looks like her head could start spinning around.

So, after a lot more ghostly goings-on in the house (which are again actually pretty cool), the ghost of bad criminal from the opening scene explains to us that he promised Harry before we saw him in the opening scene that he would change and be good. And... that's supposed to excuse him somehow of his crime? No. Not when as we open, he is still hiding a kid upstairs and won't tell Harry where he is (you'll recognize this whole "where's the kid?!" thing from dozens upon dozens of tv detective shows- I've seen it more times than I can count). Can you believe I actually have to say things like: cop drama thrillers are NOT the same as horror? How the fuck did the genre get like this? What is wrong with people? Okay, I'm getting side-tracked; this story finds a predictable and shockless resolution when after being "spooked" enough by the house and the ghost of dead kidnapper, Harry is turned into the same crying, sniveling girl that he made kidnapper from the beginning into. Though, in all honesty, watching cinema stock badboy Jack Noseworthy (of same John Waters movie our black sidekick is from, Cecil B. Demented- neat coincidence) cry out, "don't hurt me!" like a little girl is actually quite funny, watching our "pro"tagonist do the same is not. I don't know about you but I don't want emotional horror with the stereotypes lifted from psychological horror. It's a bad mix. Guys don't have to be strictly tough or wimpy. The human race isn't always that stereotypical- we have nuances, ya know?

Finally, like the first episode, this turns out to be shot and executed so flatly that there's no chance of you being scared. Which puts you ahead of me since I care less about being scared and more about being interested in what I'm watching. This one didn't have me at hello and at goodbye, I'm ready to never even bother with this director again. Though come to think of it, I never caught Anderson's claim to horror fame: 2001's Session 9. And as a matter of fact, I also skipped his 2nd season Masters of Horror episode and after this, I'm glad I did.

[nopersonality]

No Respect


Fear Itself
Episode 3 - "Family Man"
(2008 / director: Ronny Yu)

★★½

Well, after two fairly shitty episodes of an alleged horror series about criminals and crooked cops, it's not a big surprise to see a third stick to the same formula. It is a surprise, however, that it doesn't exactly suck. The reason why is because there is not a lack of trying to suck: it even starts out with people singing "Amazing Grace." This would either turn out to be entirely pointless or just stupid. If it is stupid, and so is the ending to this episode, then perhaps that makes it okay somehow. Because in that case, our effect has a cause. Under any other circumstances, this ending would be a disappointment. We've seen it before, it kicks our "good" guy of the body-switching pair Dennis when he's down just for trying to protect his family, and makes his entire struggle in this episode (which we're meant to feel deep for) meaningless. But, like the good guy, our hands are tied and so the episode forces us to reconsider everything we're being shown. Best example I can use is probably how boring Dennis's family is. No matter how badly you may feel for Dennis's situation, you are never going to care about what happens to his wife and children. Sure, they're sweet. But they couldn't be more boring. I may have complained about that kind of thing in Masters of Horror but at least this episode gets points for shooting it better, making the dialogue much tighter, and hiring actors who don't make you want to bash their heads in (this applies exclusively to We All Scream for Ice Cream but, seriously, Masters season 2 had some mighty awful casting choices). What more could we expect from such a bland state of the world with almost zero spirit, personality, or diversity left to find?

Anyway, culture rant aside, this episode proves there's nothing left to tear out of middle America's poster family. But it does give us a few tiny scraps to get by on. The best one being that our "bad" guy of the body switching pair Richard cannot feel pain. The episode does almost nothing with it, but it helps soften the "not this again" blow to the police brutality scenes. What it should have done was make the cops the slightest bit believable. Instead, they're just screaming zombies who aren't dead yet. If this is meant to be a harsh reality message, it's failing. Like most reality based ideas in the new millennium. I shouldn't go here, but it's just like Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men said. Only it's not a matter of realizing the truth driving someone crazy, but rather the filmmakers can't show us reality. They don't seem to know how. This is why you see people complain about things like cliches (ever wondered why they do that or why it ever mattered in the first place?). If you know a reality more real than the one a movie or tv show is trying to inflict on you, aren't you likely to pull away? Now, I do remember saying before this doesn't exactly suck. Credit for that rests mainly on the two actors playing the body switchers. Clifton Collins Jr. as serial killer Richard with the father's soul inside his body is a beautiful, tortured creature passionately committed to making us believe he's suffering. Mistaken identity crisis goes a long way in getting the audience's sympathy, but no- this actor is really good. And on the other side, "family man" Colin Ferguson is relentlessly charming, handsome, and effectively creepy. He's also the guy we see the most of, so his performance is more important.

The danger with a role like this is that a man in the new millennium playing 'stressed-out guy with "modern rage"' could easily become a mindless thug (ala- Masters of Horror's The Screwfly Soluton) rather than a man filled with anger by something we can understand. And Ferguson is such a Lifetime movie kind of guy that it's hard to accept anything other than some slightly downgraded degree of sensitivity driving his decison-making. Every word out of his mouth typically has an undercurrent of "if you ever need to talk, I'm there for you." And yet, despite the inherent difficulty in transforming himself from lowly working-stiff sidekick to what his character (the serial killer inside the banker's body) sees as He-Man, Ferguson manages to rise above the thug-level drudgery. Instead he becomes a kind of used car salesman with a dark side. Imagine Fargo's Jerry Lundegaard only confidant, menacing, and with the physicality to put you in the hospital. You wouldn't even notice how butch Ferguson is until his alien spiritual id comes along. His toughguy outbursts are fueled by what he sees as his responsibility to protect the family he's acquired due to the switch, but we see they don't really need a bodyguard. He only serves to get in their way. Which isn't very interesting and makes it all the more predictable that they're going to die. Still it provides me with a dilemma: should things have been different, or is this good enough being average with Ferguson an interesting allegory for what modern life could turn any man into? In fact, neither man in the other's shoes is able to keep their cool. Good guy Dennis in the killer's body is driven to violence by bad cop and stale prison life cliches, and he's merely the isolated one.

There's still a lot more this episode could have done but as a finished product, it's more than I expected. At least it's something of a redemption for Ronny Yu after Freddy vs. Jason (currently on my top 10 list of worst horror movies I've ever seen). Pity though; he had 5 years to turn in something outstanding and this winds up being barely above average.

[Deleted]

Party Favor 16: Father & Child Reunion


Children of the Corn II:
The Final Sacrifice
(1992 / director: David Price)

★★

If you don't remember my review of the original Children of the Corn, let me sum it up for you: bad movie. But I gave it 2 stars because I thought it was a good visual experience and the music was great too. This movie is no improvement in terms of effects or music. But, in a shocking twist, the acting and storytelling are greatly improved. In fact... the movie is perhaps too loaded to work properly. Unless you came to sit and admire how much more ambitious this film is than your typical direct-to-video sequel. (Actually, this had something of a theatrical release; likely limited.) Every major character has a backstory and we learn it in a not pushy or heavy handed way. There are several subplots- one of which seeks to invent a chemical/medical explanation for why the kids kill the adults. The movie also has a refreshing dark sense of humor (the bingo scene is highly amusing) and makes bizarre cinematic references (an extended play on The Wizard of Oz involving twin wicked-witch characters... I don't know why). And for once, this sequel intends to put the children and adults on an even playing field. The kids get less screentime but remain very mature, smart, and well-developed. Here's one of two major areas where the film gets overloaded: our young protagonist, Danny, is carrying around the whole "child of divorce, unplanned pregnancy- nobody wants me" burden but is a little too old (the youngest he can pull off is 17 yet he's basically supposed to be pushing 15... and yes, emotionally, there is a big difference) for his major problem to still be the fact that his parents neglect him. In my experience, children of divorce learn to be more independent at an earlier age and rely less on their family. Basically, this kid would have a life by now.

But if there's one good thing I can say about this set-up, it's that I appreciate unconventional family stories. Here, Danny is forced to go on a road-trip with his writer father who he never sees and the two have a very interesting conflict. The father is the immature, aimless, irresponsible one and the son is the judgmental, pressuring, shaming, and guilt-mongering one. Watching them argue, the son easily takes the lead and the father has no choice but to admit that he's a consummate screw-up. You don't get to see that dynamic in many movies. On the other side of the coin, Danny strikes up a fair-weathered friendship with corn-kid cult leader, Micah, who unintentionally puts the father and son relationship into perspective for him. After Danny has an argument with his father, Micah creepily rushes over to lick his wounds. Micah tries to relate but his family background is radically different- his father was an abusive asshole who beat the shit out of him. Abuse, of course, is not the same as neglect, and as adults start turning up dead here, Danny asks Micah, "were you glad when your father was killed?" No matter what his response, Danny knows it's time to pull away from the creepy kid. With all his spare time not spent patching up his fractured relationship with his father, both father and son have time to persue romances. There's only one thing I have to say about that: the music is really pulling for Hollywood cred here, especially during Danny and his blonde girlfriend's roll in a cornfield. Creepiest thing in the movie, bar none. I'm guessing it was on-loan from some Disney made-for-TV melodrama about a girl's adventures with her horse.

The second major area of story artery clogging comes in the form of a wise-cracking but sophisticated Native American philosopher / college professor who arrives to give the writer father more shit. His function in the story is to attempt-to-clarify the way-out clues the story is throwing at us, but he's dangerously close to turning into a Rafiki to the father's Simba. Wise old Native American characters typically suffer from Flawless Person Disorder (probably worst of all is that we never see he has any connection to the town- he just pops in and out of scenes where the "white man" father is still the main focus kind of like a ghost) but this guy's nonetheless the most entertaining character in the film. Though the film eventually settles on "...maybe God's just pissed off" as the reason why the children turn evil and start killing the adults, which is admirable, the White Man and Red Man stumble onto a freak conspiracy involving the town's nerve-wracked doctor and kooky racist Sheriff to harvest and sell toxic Troll 2 poisoned corn which is covered with a mysterious dusty green chemical that has the power to make children delusional. So... the kids are imagining all this? I turn your attention to the scene where we're first introduced to this chemical: where it's actually a magical Doom Marker mud that pinpoints which people the children are supposed to kill next. This scene explains nothing and only serves to give us a host of crazy, evil adults running amok alongside the killer kiddies. But give it points for hysteria. Same with the rest of the film. This is an easily superior sequel. Though it clearly needs some work in the effects departments, the characters are worth investing in for 90 minutes and though the story is silly and all over the map- give this franchise points for thinking story was ever that important.

[Deleted]

Party Favor 17: Corny


Children of the Corn III:
Urban Harvest
(1995 / director: James D.R. Hickox)

★½

Children of the Corn is an extremely rare breed of franchise, one where its' flaws are typically part of its' charm. In case you haven't noticed by its' subtitle, Urban Harvest, this Corn sequel is taking you to the streets. Hmmm. And that 1995 put this franchise on par with Leprechaun in that they're both purely gimmicks gone berserk, both on their 3rd go-round, and now both suffering fools through direct-to-video, should tell you something about the genre's pre-Scream confused desperation. 1995: broken down and badly in need of repair, the genre was satured with religious horror (even though it was anything but an overly religious time in American culture), Hollywood period schlock, and the last-leg leftovers of sci-fi horror (pre-Mimic "revitalization"). Credit to Dimension for knowing what the genre really needed (smart slashers) but not how to give it to us. The pre-Scream years were pure trial and much error. So much so that I'm almost saddened to say Leprechaun was the finest thing on the market. In America. Until In Space (but, of course, you already know how I feel about that piece of shit), where Dimension's Children of the Corn - and even Hellrasier - were able to take the lead in the horror franchise race. But I want to be clear about something: only with clever humor and lots of it were films like the Leprechauns, Dr. Giggles, and There's Nothing Out There able to carve a quality identity for low-budget horror. This isn't to say the decade wasn't littered with low-budget efforts that tried to be serious and failed. Although, Urban Harvest seeks to set itself apart from both of these main roads by coasting down the middle.

Urban Harvest is only culture shock in so far as it being Dimension's gimmick. Hickox the 3rd (no, really, this isn't the same guy who directed Theater of Blood or the guy who directed Hellraiser III- this is yet ANOTHER Hickox; that in itself is a sign of oddness to come) is interested in making something... stranger. For example, I should really be fascinated by its' plot set-up but all I can do is slap my own forehead. I can't even read you the plot, I have to explain something upfront. Its' 2 Bible belt kids are not socially backward, frightened brothers being exposed to the harsh city youths; this pairing can best be described as an evil Pinocchio and... yes, the stoner cousin who lived in a van from Step by Step. Whether getting into an altercation with a "bully" or learning what basketball is, the movie decides to forget about little details like what's going on inside the characters' heads. Both brothers react by not reacting. This isn't so much a problem with the evil brother but with the "normal" one... it shouldn't just be freaking me out that he's a cardboard cut-out of both what a well-adjusted city teenager is and what a quiet, well-mannered farmboy is. He's basically a Walton Power Ranger. As for Pinocchio... well, he's an entirely different set of problems. Forget that he's also a wretched actor (previously he played a TERRIFYING dream demon in Demonic Toys, a movie smart enough to dub him over), he's basically this movie's Margaret White- peddler of tripe that nobody wants to hear. But the movie has the convenient plot of having him be some kind of sorcerer who puts a spell over his new high school's students and consequently, they all get Eli fever. This goes back to what I was saying about religion in horror in the mid-90's. I won't call it taboo, but I will say that everything which could've been said had already been said. Now, imagine a 13 year old kid literally trying to use all that garbage to oppress you. If I may: it feels the same as Chucky humping your leg.

I want to say that taking 3 years off didn't do Corn any favors but it certainly has given this direct-to-video sequel a hell of a lot in the production values department. This is more to do with Disney having picked up Dimension in its' acquisition of the Weinstein brothers' Miramax father branch. But culturally, this sequel is not with the times. I can't for a second fathom a single teenager being able to relate to this story. Two brothers from the sticks are dropped in the middle of the big city- one fits in without having to try, the other fits in by using magic, and all of this goes down without a single significant conflict. Getting back on the Eli character for a moment, even Teen Witch showed its' teenager discovering her magical powers and seeing how they could go wrong before she used them to sway her popularity. Not that the "going wrong" part is relevant to this movie since we know Eli is up to no good the second we see him next to a particularly nasty looking scarecrow. But there's absolutely no reason to fear this kid. To compare this twirp to the last corn-kid, at least Micah had a believable human side and believable human reactions before he started amassing his army. Eli is just evil for the sake that good (or: blah, if the "normal" brother is meant to be this movie's representation of good) can't exist without evil to keep the natural balance in order. Speaking of... if ever a horror film really needed to ditch a progressive subplot- it's this movie's "only a woman can see the evil that lies within." This cliche was pointed out to me in the Re-Animator DVD suppliments and now, it's become something of a curse. In one of the most nauseating vaginal metaphors I've ever witnessed, this movie's (unable to conceive?) mother figure sees Eli crawling out of a hole in the wall of her garden and notices that he's killing her flowers. To cement the theme of him violating her sexually, the movie has him stick his tongue in her ear and give her freak sexual nightmares.

I think it's pretty clear that this movie's biggest problem is Eli. It's possible that without him or given his character a complete rewrite, the rest of the movie might be salvageable. Or... maybe it's the actor, Daniel Cerny. This movie just took any kid (really) and based on the charisma of the character they envisioned, had him deliver sermons to the entire school before we actually know he's using the bugs in his suitcase to brainwash the students. Technically, we are meant to think he has the power to reach out to and affect people simply based on his public speaking skills. Of course, I'm sitting here and seeing that he doesn't have any public speaking skills. He sticks out WAY too much trying to convince the students they should turn against and kill the adults because... well, like Eli having no greater purpose than to just be evil, the movie doesn't give the students any purpose after being brainwashed. We just expect that the kids are going to kill the adults since this is a Children of the Corn movie. Worse than that, however, during one particularly painful scene, Eli actually tries to paint "being an adult" as the cause for social problems such as pollution and deforestation. Even though his masterplan involves industrialization and his evil cornpatch ruins soil and kills flowers. I'm I wrong for greatly preferring the last film's approach of trying to show the differences between "child" and adult as being that the adults don't understand what it's like to be young? This film actually had a real underlying issue at its' ready but when you finally do see the students sulking around the school hallways dressed in black, it feels like the movie is insulting the youth of America rather than honestly tapping into their anxieties.

[Deleted]

Party Favor 18: Corn in My Side


Children of the Corn IV:
The Gathering
(1996 / director: Greg Spense)

★★

How does one go about making a sophisticated film from the Children of the Corn formula? Beats me, but this sequel - considered the best in the eyes of many people who've actually endeavored to watch all 7 films in the series (there are 9 now but two were made in the last 3 years, so who cares?) - sure wants to try. The acting in this film is literally top notch. From everyone but this installment's evil corn kid-cult leader but thankfully, he doesn't talk in very many scenes. It's shot magnificently, the production design is superb, the story is intelligent even though the dialogue could use a little padding to make it less cliched, and the casting is excellent (featuring poor Naomi Watts in a role that will haunt her for the rest of her career). This film also has the most developed and controlled narrative of the entire franchise, a surprisingly nuanced and graceful theme of abandonment by and subtle distrust of adults. Which peeks its' head in in the least likely of places. For example, during a town epidemic of children's flu, Watts' character (a college-age doctor working at a family healthcare clinic) has to take a little boy's temperature with an old non-digital thermometer and tells him it tastes like strawberry. When he responds with, "you lie," he does so in a very intensely distrustful manner, yet also manages to not go over the top. Sadly, this tide turns later when the kids have to begin acting evil and killing the adults. But in the meantime, if you have to be watching a supernatural slasher film with the novelty of taking place in a farm town where cornfields are cursed / haunted, this kind of quality filmmaking is appreciated. Somewhat tragically though, this is still a low-budget supernatural slasher in the mid-90's and... something has to give. In this case, director Spense clearly spent the part of the budget reserved for special effects on the style. So, this sequel has probably the cheapest looking blood and make-up effects of all 7. Which cripples it more than you'd expect.

Be it studio mandate or the director's preference, The Gathering eventually positions itself as a schlock film in the worst kind of way. Choosing not to shadow or lean-in to its' monster and gore scenes, but instead to shove them right in the camera's face and this leads to all sorts of problems. Beside being a slasher film where practically all the death scenes are write-offs, there are other logical problems with the gruesome portions of the film. Such as teleporting ghosts (which truly bother most viewers of slasher and zombie films) and possessed kids. Man I hate to finally harp on this since without it there is no Children of the Corn- but when you have any character in a movie kill another character who doesn't threaten them first, the killer is a villain. But the race against the clock of the film is to make the children not kill anyone. And afterward, the boys we see viciously slicing up and terrorizing the old doctor for example will just go back home with their mother and the movie will never mention that they attacked anyone with a sickle blade. The movie sure works its' butt off establishing how much we should be afraid of them - not their disease - and making them villains. It just doesn't sit right with me somehow to put emphasis on something and not resolve it by film's end. Most of the story loose ends are tied up, but if it involves a character's death- the film seems to completely lose interest. As when they turn the movie's recluse basket-case played by horror vet Karen Black into a hero to try and save her lost son after spending her entire plotline cowering in fear. What happens to her after that? She becomes a disposable victim to up the bodycount and the scene doesn't even have the guts to make a spectacle out of it. The movie spends a sizeable chunk of its' story building up her struggle to overcome her frear and how does it pay-off? She's just pulled offscreen by the corn vines.