Compare & Contrast: Kairo/Pulse

I want to try something a little different this week, something I’ve been thinking about trying for awhile. If a foreign horror movie does well, as often as not it’s going to get a U.S. remake. And these remakes range from almost shot-for-shot duplicates of the original film to ones where tattered scraps of the original film cling to something otherwise wildly different. I think these exist mostly because the film industry in the U.S. makes a regular habit of underestimating the intelligence of audiences. Reading subtitles isn’t difficult, and if you’ll avoid a film because you don’t like to read…well, you’re part of the problem.

But within that space, there’s some potential to make observations about the differences between them. What survives the transition, and what doesn’t, which details changed and which ones didn’t. These choices can be revealing about the assumptions made by either set of filmmakers, and what sort of cultural touchstones go into making horror films, and what those say about their respective cultures. So what I’d like to do in a compare and contrast post is look at the original film and the remake side-by-side, to see what worked, what didn’t, and what the choices made in each film might tell us about the societies that produced each film.

A lot of this, for me, begins with what was colloquially referred to as “J-horror,” a group of horror films made in Japan from the late 90s to early 00s. It does seem to be sort of a watershed moment that marked increasing interest in horror films made outside of the U.S., and at a point where streaming hadn’t yet made access to films from all over the world easier. So along came remakes of the higher-profile J-horror films. So that’s where I’d like to start with this. My last post was on the film Kairo (Pulse), which is a (rightly) well-regarded example of the form. A bleak, chilly meditation on loneliness and urban isolation, it received a remake, titled Pulse, in the U.S.. The two films share a few similarities, but they are by far more different than similar, and I’ll likely be spoiling details of both films, so if you haven’t seen Kairo, maybe come back once you have - it’s pretty good. Overlong, but pretty good. The remake? Well, not so much.

AHOY! SPOILERS AHEAD! 

To start, both films share the same basic premise: Some kind of mysterious signal is transmitting itself over the internet, people who are exposed to it start committing suicide, and ghosts are starting to appear wherever these suicides occur. After that, things really diverge narratively and cinematically. In Kairo, the film followed two parallel storylines, that of Michi, an employee at a plant nursery, and Ryosuke, an economics student, as they separately discover this strange phenomenon. Pulse replaces the two parallel storylines with one, that of a young college student named Mattie and her friend group. This doesn’t really help or hurt the film, but the characters are so stock that it’s kind of annoying. It’s often difficult for me to pick up on character nuances in subtitled films, but in the remake it’s clear that these are two-dimensional college-kid caricatures, more concerned with partying and getting laid than anything else. Worse, the addition of a model-handsome miscreant who goes from “dude who bought a stolen computer” to Mattie’s love interest in rapid order is so fucking tiresome. He’s literally just some dude who purchased stolen property and maybe twenty minutes later he’s her biggest confidante, and by the end they’re making out. It isn’t necessary, it does nothing for the story or the characters, it just gives the filmmakers a chance to shove a dude with razor-sharp cheekbones and impeccably groomed beard stubble into the whole thing. That’s what a lot of horror movies in the U.S. were back in the 00s - impossibly good-looking people getting bumped off for reasons. Neither film was ever going to be a character study, but it’s really difficult to see this as anything but ticking boxes on some kind of focus-grouped checklist.

The changes to the film itself - the art direction, the specific story choices, the narrative details - are much bigger and really work to make the original and remake into two sharply different films. Kairo relied a lot on mood and atmosphere - it was a quiet, relatively empty movie, somber and melancholy. It took place in a drab, overcast part of Japan, full of rain-stained brutalist apartment buildings, and its important moments were simple- a silent figure in the corner of the room, mysterious black stains on the wall, people sitting still in barely-lit rooms, pale figures that bent and twisted as they walked. The result was eerie and full of dread, with the inexplicable horror of a nightmare. Pulse is not a quiet, empty movie. You’ve got your nightclub scene, you’ve got your bustling college campus, you’ve got evil cyber-ghosts who are all glitch and stutter and visual noise, a riot of special effects who make weird growling noises and suck people’s souls out of their faces. Do they come through electronic devices? Yes, except when they just pop out of washing machines for no apparent reason. They suck your life force out through the magic of special effects, then you lose the will to live, and then you just…vanish? Maybe we’re supposed to assume that they kill themselves, but this is a film that’s far more squeamish about the idea of suicide than the original was, even though it was sort of central to the original’s thesis. Sometimes they get these creepy black growths spreading all over their body and then they turn into ashes in yet another display of digital effects. And then more screaming, more jump scares, and an ending that sheds all of the quiet sadness of the original for an unnecessary monologue that just restates what we’re seeing with our own eyes. There’s no mood or atmosphere here, just a lot of yelling and musical stings to let us know when to be scared and pale, hairless figures screaming at people before doing special effects at them. It’s borderline-incoherent in the degree to which it just sort of seems like a bunch of cliches pulled out of a bag. Psychology gets some mostly-irrelevant lip service, there’s this weirdly antagonistic shrink who just sort of appears out of nowhere and harangues the protagonist, there’s a professor who talks about stalking and then isn’t seen again for most of the movie…until he gets killed, and there’s a lot of cyber-gibberish (“but I shut down the system!” “It doesn’t matter! THEY ARE THE SYSTEM!”). Pulse doesn’t feel like anything except a pointless racket.

Pulse is also a much more literal film than the original. In Kairo, computers weren’t really the point. It was a film about loneliness and alienation, and computers just facilitated that, a window into other lonely lives. Sure, there was some stuff about spirits spilling through into our world because their realm was full (a nice nod to “when there’s no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth”), but like everything else in the film, it was never really fleshed out. It was cryptic and opaque, but there was enough internal consistency that it felt like nightmare logic, like there was a sense to be made if only we looked hard enough. In Pulse, computers are the entire point. Technology is slathered all over every frame, everyone constantly checking their cell phones (not even smartphones), “cyber”-this and “cyber”-that, hackers, every single bad internet cliché of the early 2000s jammed into the movie, and eventually, after a lot of wandering around getting scared (and the occasional borderline-pointless nightmare sequence shot in a style I can only describe as “aggressively desaturated”), it turns out that some telecom engineers delved too greedily and too deep and unleashed some kind of malevolent presence on our world. So no, it’s not the malaise of modern life, it’s these evil creatures that want to feed on our will to live. This is explained at length in a third-act infodump, though it’s far from the only time that we get told stuff that was already apparent to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. Symbolism’s for the other guy, we’re going to make this as simple as possible because we have no faith in the intelligence of our audience.

Where Kairo was quiet, Pulse is loud. Obvious, hamfisted, devoid of mood or atmosphere, made up of a few segments lifted from Kairo absent any real context surrounded by 2000s-era mass-market horror film cliches. The original made sense as a piece of Japanese film. The loneliness of modern urban life, increasing isolation, black stains on the wall evoking the shadows of Hiroshima, restless spirits. All of these make sense in the context of Japanese history and culture. The remake grabs bits here and there, but disregards any of that context, and the results, besides being noisy and overwrought, also verge on nonsensical in places, mostly because they seem thrown into a different, more generic horror movie without regard for why they’re there. Really, the more I think about it, the more this seems like it was originally an unrelated movie about evil websites or evil cellphones or something, and they lifted two or three bits from Kairo to rebuild the movie around. It’s got almost nothing to do with the original, it’s not even in conversation with the original, it’s just a butchering of a much-better film.

IMDB entry for Kairo
IMDB entry for Pulse

Kairo on Amazon
Pulse on Tubi
Pulse on Amazon

Milk & Serial: J/K Bro, It’s Just A Prank

I don’t think this is any kind of huge revelation or anything, but some of the best horror films being made right now are not coming out of the studio system. Which makes sense – studios are in the business of making profitable films, and when you’re in the business of making profitable films, you aren’t going to want to take chances. You want product that’s going to bring in an audience. Has this lead to a glut of remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels and (ugh) franchises? Yes. A lot of slick, glossy exercises in jump scares. And there’s an audience for that, but I’m not it. So in an environment where there are actual alternatives to the studio system and consumer-grade cameras and editing software are getting better, you get people willing to take chances and pursue their vision and actually getting it out there in front of eyeballs like mine, and it’s refreshing.

Milk & Serial is a great example of this. It’s a sharp, nasty, unnerving bit of short horror that does a really good job of working within its limitations and making its apparent amateurishness an asset.. And it’s on YouTube, of all places!

The whole thing picks up in medias res, as a dude nicknamed Seven is setting up some kind of a prank as part of his buddy Milk’s birthday party. Milk and Seven have a YouTube channel called “Prank Bros,” where they are…well, two bros, pulling pranks. It’s a pretty involved stunt, using bullet squibs and an actual handgun firing blanks. Seven’s invited some rando to Milk’s birthday party, someone he knows from, well, somewhere else, and Milk isn’t happy about it. While they’re arguing about it, there’s commotion from the living room and they run in just in time to see this rando holding a gun on their friend Naomi. He fires and Naomi goes down. And then, once the initial shock has passed, she pops back up and they all start singing “Happy Birthday.” Those kinds of pranks.

The party is brought down a little when someone knocks on the door to complain about the noise. Nobody recognizes him, and after they placate him he goes away, only to be discovered hanging around outside.

The next day they find him sitting in their living room.

It’s a little more than an hour long, clearly shot on a shoestring budget, and it ends up being really impressive – it doesn’t have much to work with, but it tells a story that doesn’t need much to work well. It’s a story told through the cameras that Milk and Seven use to film their pranks, which are consumer-grade camcorders, there are phone cameras, there are even spy glasses at once point – it creates the feeling that everything these two guys do is recorded to be turned into content. At the same time, it’s pretty clear pretty quick that this isn’t strictly raw footage. So calling it a found-footage film (which is how it’s marketed) sort of does it a disservice. Fortunately, it doesn’t seem too bound to the conceit, and the ways it breaks plausibility are fairly easy to overlook in favor of what it does well. It looks like jittery cinema verite, shot by the kind of frat-bro assholes you’d expect to do a prank show on YouTube, giving it a nastiness and immediacy that fits the narrative perfectly. It really does feel like you’re watching something that’s going to end up being evidence in a manslaughter trial or something similar, and still manages to fit in some nice camerawork, using focus to dramatic effect in a couple of places and benefitting from an abrupt, clipped editing style that jumps between perspectives with a suddenness that communicates tension and unease even at relatively mundane moments.

On top of that, the type of story it is, told the way it is gives it some thematic heft. It is nominally a film about a prank that goes wrong, and it does a good job of keeping the audience on its toes. It’s almost a nesting doll of a story, and setting things up that way means that it’s very much a story about the line between truth and fiction. Where do the pranks stop and real events begin? What even is real in this context? It’s true for both the audience and for characters in the story as well – we’re watching a story that looks just like something you might find on some random YouTube channel, and we’re watching it on YouTube, so there’s a lot of reflexivity to it. Meanwhile, the longer the story goes on, the harder it is for the characters in the film to tell what’s actually happening and what’s a setup for yet another prank until it’s too late. It ends up going some very dark places, and it works in that regard because the performances are strong and naturalistic - which they really need to be for a found-footage movie -  and in at least one case, sincerely unnerving. So you get what looks at least initially like something you might actually find on YouTube (and you’re…watching it on YouTube), you get a sense of how it’s going to unwind…until it doesn’t unwind that way and you realize that something really, really bad is going on.

Some time back, I wrote about a film called I’m Just Fucking With You, which largely squandered the opportunity to be a horror film that digs into the inherent viciousness and cruelty of pranks. This film doesn’t squander it, instead it faces it head-on and then blows right past it in something that reminds me of nothing so much as Creep and the segment “Amateur Night” from V/H/S – it’s persistently uncomfortable in the best way and is a great example of how budget doesn’t dictate quality.

Between the Adams family, analog horror like Local 58, Kane Parsons’ work on The Backrooms, and people like Kyle Edward Ball and the Phillipou brothers getting feature-length films distributed off the back of their own work on YouTube, this is a really good moment for indie horror, and I’m excited to see what comes next.

IMDB entry
Available on YouTube 

Chakushin Ari: Ghosts In The Machine

One of the things that I’ve really come to appreciate after writing this thing for so long is just how much any given horror film is informed by the values of the culture it comes from. What scares someone can tell you quite a bit about what’s important to them, and if you watch enough movies produced in a particular place, the more you start to see the same underlying themes and imagery show up consistently. England, for example, does a good line in horror that taps into pre-Christian traditions; the United States likes its overtly bloody parables about the dangers of premarital sex.

I’ve watched my share of Japanese horror writing this thing, and some things about modern Japanese horror really clicked into place for me after watching Chakushin Ari (One Missed Call) this week. Which is good, because the film itself only works fitfully, and has some serious pacing issues, especially toward the end.

One night, college students Yumi and Yoko go out to dinner after class, and like any other young people in the early 2000s, they’ve got cellphones. Not smartphones, just those tiny-ass little cellphones with the most basic messaging and camera functions. Yoko gets a notification that she missed a call - oddly enough, it was a missed call from her own number, and there’s a voicemail. When she listens, she hears her own voice saying “it’s starting to rain,” and then there is a horrible scream. So that’s creepy.

Even creepier is that the voicemail is timestamped two days in the future.

The conceit, then, isn’t that hard to figure out. People get mysterious voicemail recordings of the moments before their own death at some point in the future and when that day comes, those people…well, die. Yoko dies, and Yumi becomes determined to try and figure out what the hell is going on. So this film fits right into a cinematic tradition that also includes the cursed videotape of Ringu and the Internet ghosts of Kairo. I think it’d be easy to chalk these all up as reactions to technology, the ways in which modern devices are bad for us, but I’m not sure that’s it, at least not in this case. It occurred to me watching this that Japan’s indigenous religion is Shinto, which as I understand it is an animist religion. So it holds the belief that objects have spirits -houses, trees, ponds, you get the idea. So why not videotapes, cellphones, or computers? I don’t think it’s a “technology bad” thing as much as it is the idea that technology, like everything else, could be expected to have spirits of its own, and when someone dies badly, maybe that gets carried on into technology just like it could into a house or forest or doll or lake. In a culture where ghosts are just a part of life, they can be anywhere.

It also follows in the footsteps of films like Ringu and Honogurai Mizu No Soko Kara by folding a legacy of parental abuse into the narrative. Like Ringu, the whole thing is handled less like a horror story than it is a mystery where the protagonists are trying to trace the chain of causality for a bunch of supernatural deaths back to its beginning, and like those films, it seems to all start with an abusive mother, and like in Honogurai Mizu No Soko Kara, it seems like the struggles of a single parent and the pressures of trying to be a good mother in a culture that doesn’t really make allowances for single parents lead to violence and trauma. In a culture where ghosts are everywhere and family is important, these are the sort of things that will be scary. It’s even of a piece with these other films in terms of its cinematography - this is the drab, overcast Japan of Kairo and  Honogurai Mizu No Soko Kara, full of dreary tower blocks, themselves full of cramped apartments. There’s even a dig at tabloid news, as one of the unlucky recipients of a voicemail is featured on a sensationalistic news program where a medium will attempt to combat or exorcise the evil spirit (it doesn’t go well), and that struck me because these are usually fairly intimate films, in that they are, like a lot of horror films, about something hidden and terrible that a small group of people are trying to escape or fight in secret. To have it acknowledged that the whole country is tuning into this phenomenon feels a little strange. Not bad or detrimental to the plot, just…strange. As if people dying mysteriously after receiving phone calls from beyond the grave is just the latest thing.

So there’s a decent bit to unpack here, but ultimately that’s sort of it, because the execution of the story itself lacks something. It’s got all of the parts of its contemporaries, but doesn’t have the striking imagery of Ringu, or the claustrophobic feeling of doom that suffuses Kairo, to name two. It’s a very quiet film, with little to no music, and in the first half or so, this tends to make things feel a little inert. There are creepy moments here and there, but nothing really startling, and a relative absence of tension makes it hard for these moments to really have an impact. There’s a lot of investigation, which means a lot of people going from place to place and asking people questions, and in those moments isn’t really distinguishable from any other drama that you started watching halfway through. You know things are happening, but it’s tough to really get drawn in. There isn’t a lot of action, which is fine, but there’s also not a lot of mood or atmosphere, and that’s a problem. Slightly clumsy translations in the subtitles don’t help, but on top of that the performances feel a little one-note. This might be because I’m relying on the subtitles, it’s often hard for me to gauge performances when they aren’t speaking English and that’s on me, but everything felt a little flat.

Many of these problems do abate somewhat in the second half of the film, as Yumi starts to piece together what’s happening and what kind of horrible legacy has lead to all of these deaths, but the action feels a little bungled as well. It’s sort of exposition-heavy - not in the sense that someone just stands there and tells you everything, to its credit there’s some really good use of flashback to catch us up - but more in the sense that it’s in the second half that everything starts happening. The problem here is that it’s trying to present a narrative that solves the underlying mystery, that makes clear what exactly happened, but it throws in enough stuff that, while good for some scares, also confuses things a little. And, most egregiously, it has one of the most obvious fake-out endings I’ve seen in awhile (or maybe it’s just because I noticed there were still 20 minutes left when everything ostensibly resolved) and instead of hitting you with the twist fast and sharp and then ending, it drags out the reveal and the twist for entirely too long, to the point that ultimately I was just waiting for it to end.

It's sort of odd - I’ve watched films that weren’t especially thematically rich, but worked well. And I’ve watched films that were thematically rich and worked well. But I don’t think I have, until now, seen a film that was pretty thematically rich but just didn’t work. It’s like it had substance in spite of itself.

IMDB entry
Available on Tubi
Available on Amazon

Ouija - Origin Of Evil: That Is One Tasty Burger

So just last week I was talking about how much I don’t like films made off the back of other films. Sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, re-imaginings, et cetera. Don’t even get me started on franchises. I think it’s the way it turns film into product. I’m not going to get all precious and “my cinema” about films, but…it’s the difference between a home-cooked meal or fine-dining experience and a burger and fries from your fast-food place of choice. But here’s the thing: Sometimes those fine-dining places get a wild hair up their ass and do their own take on the burger and fries. It’ll be a burger and fries, but the meat is top sirloin, the bun freshly baked, the fries hand-cut and fried in duck fat. The form is fast food, but the execution isn’t.

That’s the analogy that came to mind while I was watching Ouija: Origin Of Evil. It’s a prequel to an apparently not-especially-good film about a haunted/possessed Ouija board. Hardly a novel idea, but it’s executed with such taste and care that the finished product is way better than you’d expect.

It's Los Angeles in 1968, and Alice Zander is conducting a séance for a middle-aged man and his visibly skeptical daughter. They’re trying to contact the man’s late wife, and Alice reaches into the beyond to make contact. The table rattles, doors open and shut, candles blow out and relight. A shadowy figure appears behind some curtains before rushing toward the daughter, screaming. The séance ends, the father and daughter leave, with Alice refusing to accept payment.

Once they’re gone, Alice goes back inside and calls to her own daughters to come out, while she breaks down the various devices she used during the séance. The younger daughter, Doris, had made cabinets rattle. Her older daughter, Lina, was the apparition behind the curtain. Lina wasn’t supposed to rush the man’s daughter, but Lina thought she was a bitch. Alice points out that that little stunt cost them their pay. And it’s pay they desperately need. Alice is a widow, and the wolves are constantly at the door. Doris prays at night to her father, she thinks he’s just gone away on business, but Lina and Alice know the truth. He isn’t coming back. Alice is tired and worried, Lina is angry in the righteous, passionate way that teenagers are. She’s straining at the leash, desperate for independence. And it’s this independence that leads her to sneak out at night, to go to a friend’s house while her friend’s mother is away at her bridge club. They listen to music, sip booze. There’s a cute boy there that Lina fancies. Then her friend pulls out this new game her mother got. It’s a Ouija board.

Lina sees how freaked out her friends get at the possibility of communicating with the dead, and mentions it to her mother as a possible new prop. Needless to say, Alice grabs one and goes to work doctoring it, magnetizing the planchette so she can manipulate it hands-free from under the table. Doris wants to know if she could use it to talk to her father, and even though Alice and Lina discourage her, once they’ve left she gives it a try. Something responds.

But it’s not her father.

In the interest of full transparency, the director made one of my favorite horror movies ever as his feature debut, so I’m a little biased. That said, everything I like about his style is on display here and it elevates the result. Like his previous films Absentia and Oculus, this film leverages the power of restraint, of not going loud or making things obvious. The scary moments tend to happen in the background, without an unnecessary amount of fanfare, and I think this makes these moments even more effective. They reward the attentive viewer, catching you unawares and being that much more startling as a result. There are some near-mandatory jump scares, and yes, they’re still jump scares, but inventive staging and - again - a lack of buildup or forecasting make them about as good as those get. It’s a film full of little moments that make you go “GAAHHHHH!” The performances are suitably restrained all-around, with no scenery-chewing to be had. Alice and Lina and Doris seem like a real family, with complicated feelings about life after their father/husband has died, Lina is a resentful teen, Doris just wants her father back, Alice is trying to keep their heads above water, and they’re all wrestling with grief in different ways. It’s not enough to provide much thematic subtext, but it also keeps everyone from feeling one-note. There’s a priest who manages to be smart and thoughtful, and even the expected romantic spark with Alice isn’t overplayed. The relative lack of histrionics throughout is refreshing.

It’s also visually self-assured. The whole thing is shot as if it had been made in the early 70s, and the attention to detail (including reel-change marks) is cool, but the picture quality is still a little too clean to look like an actual film from the 70s, so as it is just seems like a really good period piece instead of a historical artifact. But it also means there’s an analog warmth to the visuals that keeps the whole thing grounded. The narrative is fairly well-paced (with one exception in the second act), and in contrast to last week’s The First Omen, the connection to the film it precedes comes only at the very end, so it works as a self-contained film, with a satisfyingly creepy ending.

On the less-effective side of the register, it does feel at a couple of points like the director’s good judgment is in a tug-of-war with a studio that wants things to be bigger, louder, and more obvious. There are couple of unnecessary musical stings, and an exposition dump at the end of the second act, that leads into a plot development that’s over the top enough to elicit an eye-roll; but largely they let him cook on what is basically a work-for-hire deal, and he took something that could have been as pedestrian as the original film apparently is (ooh, evil Ouija board! Nobody’s ever done that before) and made it genuinely spooky.

There’s an art to making a good classically scary movie, and I feel like that art gets forgotten. You don’t need to shove a bunch of screaming distorted faces at the audience, you don’t need dopey teens doing the dumbest things (at one point, Lina says “splitting up would be the dumbest thing we could do” and I got a good chuckle out of that), you don’t need blaring musical stings to tell us that what we’re seeing is scary. You just need to trust your audience’s intelligence and the result is going to be a lot better. A burger and fries is still just a burger and fries, but made correctly, with really good ingredients, it’s going to be exceptional.

IMDB entry
Available on Netflix
Available on Amazon

Near Dark: Families Of Blood And Choice

If it isn’t clear from previous posts, I am extremely picky about vampire movies. Mostly because I feel like they’ve been done to (ha-ha) death, and if I’m being honest, the Twilight series both made serious bank and sort of ruined the concept for awhile. I’m not really a fan of the vampire as romantic figure, like you get with Interview With The Vampire or the Twilight series. The whole “oh woe is me for I live forever and must watch all beautiful things wither and die” schtick? Miss me with that. Films like 30 Days Of Night are more my speed. I like it when they’re threatening.

Needless to say. Near Dark has been on my radar for some time as a highly-praised hidden gem of the genre. But it wasn’t easily accessed on streaming until recently, and so when I saw it was available, I jumped on it immediately. And now having seen it, I definitely understand its cult-classic status; it’s a sharp, gritty Western about the nature of family that deals in blood in a couple senses of the word.

It’s a lazy night in rural Oklahoma, the mosquitos are out, and three good ol’ boys are scuffling and shit-talking like you do when you live someplace where that’s all there is to do. They spy a pretty young lady enjoying an ice cream cone, and one of the three - a strapping young man named Caleb - decides to shoot his shot with her. Her name is Mae and it goes fairly well, but she’s awfully concerned about getting home before sun-up. Caleb thinks she’s got a strict daddy and he’ll just charm her out of trouble, but there’s something vehement, almost desperate about it. So Caleb decides that he’s going to blackmail her. He’ll get her home before sunrise, but she has to kiss him. And Mae kisses him, and then bites him. Hard. Hard enough to draw blood, and hard enough for her to drink. Which she does before leaving a dazed Caleb on his own to recover. And when Caleb finally comes to, he feels like shit - sick, woozy, gagging.

When he stumbles out into the sunlight, he starts to burn.

Along comes a Winnebago, its windows lined with foil, and Caleb gets snatched up by the occupants. There’s Jesse, Diamondback, Severen, Homer…and Mae. Whatever it is they do, they don’t like to leave witnesses, and Severen cheerfully explains that he’s going to cut Caleb’s head off. Mae points out that she bit him but didn’t bleed him out. So now Mae has made him everybody’s problem. They have to explain to him what he is now, and what it’s going to take for him to survive. They’re going to see if he’s got the stomach for it. Meanwhile, back at the family homestead, Caleb’s father and little sister are worried because Caleb’s gone missing. Local law enforcement doesn’t seem too bothered - young man like that, he’s probably just off with a girl or something and he’ll come home soon enough. But they know Caleb better than that. So we have Caleb, and two families. There’s his father and little sister, and then this motley band of…well, nobody’s saying the “v” word, but they drink blood and can’t go outside during the day. It’s not much of a leap.

There’s nothing romantic about these vampires; theirs is a life of one stolen vehicle after another, hiding in barns and garages, sleeping under tarps and never staying in one place for too long. Very few of the usual cliches apply – sunlight’s lethal but they don’t give a shit about crosses or running water or garlic. They don’t even have fangs, but they kill and they drink and they live through almost everything else. The violence is quick and brutal – practiced killers who have learned that this is what they need to do to survive. And some of them, especially Homer and Severen, seem to really, really enjoy it with the glee that comes from realizing that rules are just constructs and there’s nothing stopping you from refusing them. But there’s a raw desperation to them akin to any group of people on the run - they’re just one step ahead of getting caught, they can’t ever settle down in one place, and at the end of the day, what they have is survival and really not much else. Mae seems to see some beauty and wonder in the idea of being alive long enough to be around when the light of distant stars finally reaches Earth, but none of the others seem to find joy in anything other than respite and murder.

Vampire movies with a family subtext are nothing new at all – the idea of one vampire siring another makes it a pretty short leap. But there are a bunch of ways to do it, as The Lost Boys, Twilight, Interview With The Vampire, and My Heart Can’t Beat Unless You Tell It To can attest. This film pits biological family (the blood part of blood being thicker than water) against a potential family of choice (that, well, drinks blood). Jesse and his brood are very much in the margins, and it could be argued that there’s not a lot of choice involved, but they’re a bunch of people bound by sharing the thing that makes them different from the norm. So there’s some subversion going on here. Usually it’s the biological family who are the terrible assholes and the family of choice who are welcoming and kind, but here, it’s tenuous. Caleb wants nothing more than to return home, but doesn’t think he can, and the family of choice, usually the safe haven for outsiders, is accepting him begrudgingly at best. Either way, it comes down to blood.

This film also came out in the same year as The Lost Boys, but where that film was closer to slick, glossy teen dramas of the time, with a definite comic streak (and a butchering of one of my favorite songs), this is deadly serious, gritty and raw the way exploitation films of the period were; it’s easy to see the influence of this film in the nomadic True Knot of Doctor Sleep and the ultraviolent road trip of The Devil’s Rejects. It takes full of advantage of the sprawling landscape of the Southwest, the long stretches of road only sparsely dotted by gas stations and roadhouses and the sort of dark that swallows people up. Jesse’s brood are apex predators, practiced at existing in the margins where people aren’t likely to be missed.

And for a lower-budget film, it definitely has some moments of visual flair – there’s a shootout in a small bungalow that makes light more dangerous than the bullets flying, and there’s lots of fiery sunrises and sunsets, long lonely vistas scorched by the sun. The soundtrack is lush synthesizer and stabs of action-movie guitar, which serves to both ground it in the 1980s and heighten the exploitation-film feeling. The protagonists are pretty uniformly decent and The Good Guys, a father who wants his son back, the adorable younger sister, and a good ol’ boy in way over his head. But the antagonists have some flavor to them – Severen, the gleefully unapologetic killer, Jesse the dour patriarch who, with Diamondback (very much the mother figure) is just trying to keep their little family alive and off the radar, Mae is sort of a nonentity, mostly defined by her affection and protectiveness toward Caleb, and Homer, who might be the most interesting one – he’s someone who has been a little kid for a very, very, very, very long time, and the resentment and loneliness are palpable.

So there’s a lot to recommend this, and probably my only complaints are that the tension between one family and the other isn’t really as fully developed as it could be. Caleb’s not really running from anything, and the story can’t seem to settle on this new existence being either alluring in its freedom from morality and consequences or a desperate fight for survival that he’s been thrust into. There are elements of both, but they’re never really fleshed out, and I found the ending a little pat and free of meaningful consequences. But apart from that, it’s a hell of a ride and that rare vampire film that I actually like.

IMDB entry
Available on Tubi
Available on Amazon

Ogsuyeog Gwisin: Burying The Story

As much as I dislike the dismissal “if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all,” I have to admit, every now and then I run across a movie that makes me think “well, this is awfully familiar.” My inclination is to blame it on lazy filmmaking or producers desperate to cash in on something transiently popular. Am I being harsh? Probably a little, but every time a film falls back on familiar, well-word stories or plot devices or imagery, it tends to take me right out of it. Maybe it’s because I watch a lot of horror movies, but it especially bugs me there. Some people take comfort in familiar things in their entertainment and I’m not immune to or above that, I just don’t like it in horror. The last thing I want out of horror is to say “oh look, more ghosts with grossly distended features…yay.”

And this isn’t the biggest problem with Ogsuyeog Gwisin (The Ghost Station), but that’s mostly because it fumbles its third act. Otherwise, what you’d have is a pleasantly solid, but derivative Korean take on Japanese horror.

Na-young Kim is a reporter at a tabloid news site, and she is in both hot water and deep shit. She took a picture of a young woman in a subway station to present as the “It Girl” of the summer, and didn’t bother to get her consent. It gets more complicated as the “It Girl” turns out to have been a man cross-dressing, and now he’s suing the tabloid. Na-young is on the hook for a settlement that consists of an utterly bankrupting amount of money, and the tabloid’s going to leave her high and dry…unless she can put together some stories that will dramatically increase clicks and ad revenue. And, being a tabloid, the more sensational the better.

And just her luck, her brother works for public transportation, and he says one of his coworkers mentioned some mysterious deaths…the most recent in a whole series of them…at Ogsu Station. They think it’s cursed.

So what we have here is sort of a Korean attempt at the sort of films that would become known as  “J-horror,” as the plucky young reporter sets out to uncover the explanation behind a bunch of unusual deaths, and ends up getting in way over her head. It’s definitely not afraid to borrow elements from Ringu (an old well features prominently) and Ju-On (creepy ghost kids), but in some ways this works to its advantage, because the borrowing ends up giving the film a solid narrative backbone in the form of a mystery that needs to be solved. Things unfold pretty nicely along those lines, with everything become gradually clearer as the film progresses and the gradual unfolding of the mystery providing an opportunity for the audience to put things together for themselves. 

And there’s some interesting subtext too, in that Na-young isn’t really digging into this story because the truth must be told, at least not initially, it’s because she’s in trouble with her boss and if she doesn’t deliver, she’s ruined. So there’s something predatory about it, at least to start, which is sort of a refreshing twist on her character. She grapples at points with all of the death and buried secrets being greeted with more and more enthusiasm at work because they’re driving engagement like nobody’s business. Not to mention how the deeper she goes, the darker and weirder everything gets, and she sees things she absolutely cannot explain. There’s something malevolent here, but she has to keep putting herself in harm’s way because there’s a demand for coverage of this cursed station now, and it’s this or saying goodbye to her livelihood. It’s a nice departure from the hapless innocent.

And that’s about the only deviation from formula we’re going to get. The film gets off to a relatively slow start after an opening that feels a touch predictable (fairly standard “this place is haunted” shenanigans that end up with someone dead) but does settle into a groove in the second act with some nice startling moments paying off in ways that aren’t especially telegraphed. Again, it’s nothing fancy – this film has one gear, and that’s Na-young or her brother poking their nose where they aren’t supposed to, talking to people that they don’t realize are dead, and then boom! Creepy ghost jump-scare. I don’t normally like jump-scares, but the filmmakers know better than to set them up so you see them coming a mile away. They’re sharp and crisp and punctuate the unfolding revelations of what happened on this land long before the station was build, and how some things just cannot be buried.

But then we get to the third act. It’s not a gigantic off-the-rails clusterfuck or anything. Again, this film is resolutely on rails. In fact, by the third act it’s clear that it’s going to keep going back to the same well (ha-ha) over and over again based on what was established in the second act, and so what was working really well to add a certain amount of eeriness and tension threatens to become predictable. And then at the climax, instead of bringing it to some kind of end, they  focus on an element to the story that was barely addressed in the first two acts. It feels like the filmmakers realized that they either didn’t have an ending, still had twenty minutes to come up with so it could be feature-length, or maybe both. The result feels like the third act is tacked on, as if they’d forgotten about part of the story and decided to deal with it all at once instead of weaving into the first two acts. 

The result is that instead of the film wrapping up and coming to a satisfying close, it sort of veers into something that doesn’t really feel organic to the overall story. Worse, it doesn’t do as much with it as it could have– there are elements to it that could tie really nicely into existing story elements, but it contents itself with sort of sputtering out in an end with a fraction of the impact it could have had. Despite having its moments, ultimately it just feels like an assemblage of parts.

IMDB entry

Available on Tubi

Available on Amazon

It Lives Inside: Assimilated

For me, one of the best things about living in an age where streaming video makes all kinds of films more accessible (even if it does mean putting up with commercials inserted at the worst possible moment) is discovering the breadth and variety of horror films from across the world. Different traditions and cultures and value systems mean that different things are a source of horror in different parts of the world, or even that the same things are scary, but in very different ways, and it’s refreshing to see things in a new light, or even see things you’ve never seen before.

None of which are to be found in It Lives Inside, a dull, rote film about the struggle for identity in an immigrant family, told with the nuance and subtlety of an After School Special.

It opens on the aftermath of something terrible. A house in shambles, moans and screams coming from the basement. A slow dolly shot takes us through the wreckage and into the one place we’re pretty sure we don’t want to go - that basement, where a badly charred body clutches a glass jar, something writhing inside.

Meanwhile, at some point later, in another household entirely, a family of three is coming together around the breakfast table. It’s Poorna, busy finishing up the meal, her husband Inesh, just getting home after working the late shift, and their daughter Samidha, who’s getting ready for school. Samidha doesn’t stop to eat, she has teenage socializing to do, against her parents’ objections. Poorna extracts a promise from Samidha to help with the preparations for a holiday celebration that’s coming up and Samidha reluctantly agrees. At school, one particular topic of conversation is Tamira, who is basically the other Indian girl at this high school. She’s weird, doesn’t have any friends, eats her lunch under the bleachers, and she’s started acting even stranger. She looks like she isn’t sleeping or taking care of herself. Tamira corners Samidha in the hallway and begs her for help. She has this thing that she has to feed. It eats raw meat, and it’s so hungry. She can’t deal with it on her own.

Tamira holds out the glass jar we saw in the prologue, and Samidha, in a fit of embarrassment, slaps it out of her hands, where it shatters on the floor.

The math is not hard to do. That jar had something evil inside of it, and now that Samidha has freed it, it’s wreaking havoc on pretty much everyone, and it’s up to Samidha to stop it. This is not a subtle movie - the thing in the jar is a spirit from Indian mythology, run amuck among whitest suburbia. It’s a film about culture clash, and in that respect it couldn’t be any more obvious. Samidha is the picture of aspirational assimilation, she insists on being called “Sam,” contemplates lightening her skin in her selfies, distances herself from family holidays as well as from Tamira, who used to be her best friend when they were kids, and from whom she immediately distanced herself when they got to high school. Poorna is a stay-at-home mom, speaks Hindi and is a firm believer in tradition. Inesh is more Westernized, speaking English, indulging Samidha’s aspirations and urging Poorna to give her space. So we have one parent who insists on keeping tradition, one who doesn’t, and a daughter trying to run away from her heritage as quickly as she can. And the evil spirit she has to stop is one from Indian mythology called a pishach, which, according to the film, is a dark spirit that feeds on negative emotions, souls and raw meat, and is somehow born from loneliness and isolation. All of which manages to jibe with the information I was able to find online while still making it sound like the most generic evil spirit ever.

And that’s not my only problem with the film, but it’s a big one - it’s absolutely an instance of a generic U.S. horror movie. It all takes place in what appears to be one of the numerous adjoining Southern California suburbs where movies like this tend to take place, and the narrative itself is mechanical and perfunctory, a repeated loop where Samidha tries to figure out what’s going on, she and other have to react to something nobody can see and somebody dies, Samidha has a nightmare, repeat for 90 minutes that feel much, much longer. The nightmare sequences take place in red-lit darkness, people get jerked around like ragdolls by an invisible beast, and that’s sort of it until the confrontation with a special effect at the climax. The filmmakers have no idea how teenagers talk (as someone whose job puts them in regular proximity to people in their late teens, I have never heard someone call a party a “kick-back.” Ever.), and of course there’s the obligatory romance with the hottest guy in school. The performances, cinematography, and scoring are unremarkable but competent, and here again there’s not a single original moment in the whole thing.

My other big problem with the film has to be the degree to which it squanders its ostensible premise. Horror films can absolutely grapple with the experiences of immigrants and the ways some things follow them from their home country no matter how far they run, as in His House. And Indian mythology definitely has its share of rich, horrifying creatures as aptly demonstrated by Tumbbad. So it’s absolutely possible to tell this story in a nuanced, human way that paints the immigrant experience in its messy, conflicted complexity while also being scary as hell, introducing the Western world to the monsters of another time and place. But ultimately Desi culture plays next to no role in the film, and any pretense of examining Samidha’s experience as a young Indian woman in the U.S. goes out the window pretty early except to the extent that it can advance the plot. It’s generic horror start to finish, complete with Final Girl confrontations and Samidha learning the lesson that it was in fact her mother who was right and she who was wrong, ending on a one-year-later note that cribs pretty hard from The Babadook with a “the end…or IS IT?” kick. The film’s as eager to avoid anything really specifically Indian as Samidha is, and that’s sort of amusing on a meta level but doesn’t make for a very interesting film.

IMDB entry
Available on Hulu
Available on Amazon

Terrifier: Insane Clown Parting (Your Head From Your Shoulders)

It’s been a long time since I took the month of October to do something a little different. While most people are talking about the horror films worth watching, that’s what I’m trying to do most of the year, so instead I try to change it up. But I think the last time I really committed to the bit was a month of films that aren’t horror films, but are totally horror films, and that was a long time ago.

So I decided that for this spooky season, I’m going to focus on the kinds of movies I usually avoid. I got the idea after watching Malignant, which, despite my reservations, ended up being fun. Although I can’t guarantee that any of the others film I watch this month will get the same reception, there’s a willful perversity to the idea that I like. I spend most of the year focusing on my lane, so October seems like a good time to stray from it, maybe interrogate my dislikes a little.

With that in mind, I really don’t like slasher movies. I like watching horror films that unnerve me, get under my skin, make me feel things, that scare me. And I don’t find slasher films very scary. Because once you get past the spectacle of ludicrously graphic violence, there’s not much there, usually. I know many people find gore and violence upsetting – and don’t get me wrong, when graphic violence is used to help tell a story with relatable people and actual emotional stakes, it can be a powerful storytelling tool, but gore and graphic violence by themselves, for their own sake, don’t really move me. At that point it’s hard for me to see them as anything other than an exercise in special effects. There’s often not much consideration for the characters, not a lot of effort to make them relatable, sympathetic people, and at their worst they can be downright reactionary.

Basically, bloody death without a story and emotional stakes or worse, presented as entertainment, isn’t my deal. And so I decided to watch Terrifier, which has a decent reputation as a pretty unapologetic slasher film. To its credit, isn’t especially reactionary (maybe a little), and it’s made with style, but at the end of the day, it’s the prototypical slasher movie stripped down to its bare bones. It’s a movie where nobody exists as anything more than cannon fodder, and the violence is the only point.

We open on a news program, where the host is about to interview a woman who is the only known survivor of the Miles County Massacre, a murder spree that occurred a year ago, last Halloween. It ended with the killer – known as Art the Clown – dead. Or so the survivor says, despite his body mysteriously vanishing from the morgue. But she’s insistent, and it’s easy to see why, as Art left her with a face that’s very hard to look at. The idea that whoever did something that horrible could return is not a comfortable one. And somewhere out in the city, there’s someone watching this program. Someone so incensed by what they see that they smash their television.

Someone putting on greasepaint and a clown costume and gathering up a bag full of very sharp implements.

And then back at the studio, we cut to the host in her dressing room talking on her phone, making all kinds of disparaging comments about the appearance of the woman she just interviewed, before the very same woman suddenly attacks her and begins mangling her face while laughing maniacally. That is a thing that happened. Now we’re following two young women, Tera and Dawn, who’ve just left a Halloween party, and discover that someone’s slashed Dawn’s tire. Tera calls her sister Victoria, who’s busy studying for finals, but agrees to come get them when her roommate staggers in drunk with some dude in tow. Tera and Dawn walk into the nearby pizza joint to get a slice while they wait. And then they look over and there’s this, like, really creepy dude in a black and white clown costume who just, like, keeps staring at them. Dawn teases Tera that he thinks she’s really cute, and then gets a selfie with him while Tera’s just getting wall-to-wall bad vibes and you can kind of tell that Tera probably prevents Dawn from making some seriously bad decisions on a regular basis. The clown never speaks, never blinks. He just keeps staring.

This is basically a slasher film with all of the fat trimmed from it. It’s not even an hour and a half long, and the story doesn’t really extend past there being a bunch of people out on Halloween night for one reason or another and now an evil clown is murdering all of them. No history, no backstory, no legends. There’s an evil clown and he’s killing people. So it gets right down to business. On the one hand, the near-minimalism of its approach is something to appreciate, but at the same time it’s also laying bare just how little there is going on beyond sensationalism here. No niceties, you just came for the killing and we know that, so here you go. In that regard, it’s all pretty two-dimensional.

But I will give it this: this film has a well-realized aesthetic. It’s grainy, the colors are garish, and everything is starkly lit. Every scene feels like a well-lit island in a sea of darkness - almost theatrical, as if spotlights are illuminating sets that consist of what’s necessary for the scene and nothing else, which makes the stripped-down, minimalist feel seem more intentional than crass. The score is ominous synthesizers right out of a 1980s slasher movie, and so along with the visuals, the whole thing feels vintage without feeling like pastiche. It evokes a mood and feeling without calling too much attention to it. Art the Clown does make for an interesting antagonist as slasher-film killers go. He’s clad and painted all in black and white, which stands out well against the blues and reds and purples and harsh light sources spilling over the rest of the frame. His face is stark white with gaping black holes for eyes and a mouth, and he’s totally silent, doing all of his expression through mime. I have to say, it’s a nice change from your bog-standard hulking figure in some kind of mask, and it ends up making for a lot of pretty striking moments, along with injecting some pitch-black wit into the proceedings. I don’t know that I would have wanted a backstory or any kind of dialogue or anything from the antagonist, because the inexplicable, near-supernatural murder clown thing worked better than I expected it to.

Outside of that, it’s wholly of its type. It's a grungy film, where every location is believably deserted, abandoned, and filthy, and there’s a lot of blood and guts (with Art’s costume getting more and more bloodstained, and the shocking red against the white is an effective visual), and though the effects aren’t the cheapest I’ve seen, they’re low-rent enough that it’s relatively easy to maintain some kind of comfortable distance from the horrible shit that’s happening. Which, yeah, that’s one of those things I don’t like. That’s what makes pain and suffering entertainment, when you can hold others’ torment and ugly deaths at arms’ length. The camera lingers on bodies getting punctured, stabbed, shot, mauled, gnawed on, stomped, and sawn in half. That’s the point of the film and really the only thing that matters. I don’t dislike these characters, certainly I don’t think they deserve their fates, but I can’t really say that I care about them either. You know right off the bat that this is a film where lots of people will die, and they do. There’s no surprise to it, no shock or upset, really. And we don’t get to know them, no there’s nothing to hope for, nobody to root for. It’s a bunch of gross death scenes broken up by cutaways to other people or someone walking from one place to the next to meet whatever fate has in store.

This film is unapologetically what it is - a film made for people who expect scene after scene of violence, and on that front it delivers. It’s got a more cohesive aesthetic than I expected, and some vivid moments among the gore, but I can’t say it’s changed my mind about the genre.

IMDB entry
Available on Tubi
Available on Amazon

The Last Broadcast: Who Wore It Better?

I’m going to start talking about this movie by talking about a different movie. When The Blair Witch Project came out in 1999, it was something different. The use of the Internet to create a myth ahead of the movie and suggest that three people had actually gone missing was a big part of this, but ultimately it was the film’s conceit - that what the audience was seeing was the recovered raw footage shot by three film students in the days leading up to their disappearance. This was not what horror in the 1990s looked like, and it blew up big.

And, as is often the case, the success of The Blair Witch Project was attended by controversy, as people came out of the woodwork to claim that it plagiarized The Last Broadcast, which was, these critics would say, the real first found-footage horror film. So, as picky as I am about found-footage horror, I figured I should watch this at the very least as a historical artifact. And you know what? The claims are baseless. The Last Broadcast is barely a found-footage film. And even if it were first, The Blair Witch Project is significantly better. More to the point, The Last Broadcast is incoherent, amateurish to the point of ineptitude, and not so much poorly paced as not paced at all. 

On December 15th,1995, four men - Steven Avkast and Locus Wheeler, hosts of the cable-access show Fact or Fiction, Rein Clackin, expert in paranormal sound recording, and Jim Suerd, their guide, went into the Pine Barrens of New Jersey to investigate the legend of the Jersey Devil. Then, on December 19th, Jim Suerd comes staggering out of the woods, miles away from where they started, and calls 911 because the rest of them are missing. 

Two days later, the bodies of Wheeler and Clackin are found. Avkast is never seen again.

In the wake of these deaths, a documentary filmmaker named David Leigh has decided to make a film about the case and Suerd’s subsequent murder trial. The film is presented as that documentary, complete with talking-head interviews and examination of both archival footage and footage shot by the group in the Pine Barrens. Before getting into the film itself, I want to look at the idea that the filmmakers who made The Blair Witch Project plagiarized this film. It’s important to note that neither group of filmmakers ever dignified the idea - this seems, in retrospect, like a collective eruption of know-it-alls attempting to maybe gatekeep low-budget horror, I guess? Regardless of motivation, it’s a groundless assertion. The Blair Witch Project was already in pre-production by the time The Last Broadcast was released, The Last Broadcast isn’t really a found-footage film (arguably the first found-footage horror film is Cannibal Holocaust, made years earlier), and the only thing the two films have in common is “group of people who have no business being in the woods go into the woods and meet a bad end.” By that criterion, both films ripped off Deliverance. 

But again, the whole thing is irrelevant because as it stands, even if it were true, the people who made The Blair Witch Project made a far superior film by pretty much every metric. Or, to be less gentle about it, this is not a well-made film. It’s let down by its production design, its writing, and its pacing.

It's pretty clear that the entire production is a homebrew affair. That’s not an indictment in and of itself, I’ve seen any number of really good horror films made on a shoestring budget, and this was filmed for, like $900. That is, even by mid-90s standards, insanely cheap. But…it looks it, at every step. Part of doing something well on a small budget is knowing and working around your limitations. A film that is ostensibly the last footage of a bunch of dudes who go into the Pine Barrens to look for the Jersey Devil? That’s doable for not a lot of money. So it’s baffling as to why the filmmakers chose to make the film a mockumentary with only a smattering of found-footage set in the woods. None of the mockumentary stuff is believable. It works for the protagonists’ cable-access show, which is just as cheap and amateur hour as you’d expect, but when the whole film exists at that level, it looks like you’re just watching someone’s attempt to approximate something outside their grasp. Maybe two of the interior sets (that aren’t explicitly someone’s residence) are believable. A woman tasked with restoring some highly-damaged videotape has a “studio” in what appears to be a gutted or under-construction building, complete with plastic tarps everywhere. Jim Suerd’s “child psychologist” (who, against all ethical guidelines, is happy to talk about client sessions to a documentary film crew) is introduced…examining a dog in what appears to be a veterinarian’s office. Which suggests to me that he is, in fact, a veterinarian, not a child psychologist. This entire production is being directed by a former soap opera director (whose existence in the story is never really justified), and he appears to live in a single room with random post-it notes studding the wall behind him. Maybe he’s seriously down on his luck, but it kind of screams “wellness check.” A law enforcement officer from the county sheriff’s department wears an ATF shirt. Which is, well, a federal agency, and not a country sheriff’s department. Although he does have a hat with “Baroake County Sheriff’s Department” on it in what appear to be iron-on letters.

It’s not just that it looks cheap, it’s also that the filmmakers didn’t do the most basic due diligence on the elements of their story either. Forensic evidence is described as circumstantial evidence. IRC messages are apparently impossible to trace despite IP addresses being something even the most bottom-feeding script kiddie could access back then. On the other hand, their broadcast is described as being a “live Internet cable broadcast” in an era before livestreaming existed at all and video compression was still extremely primitive. All kinds of wireless Internet access tech that’s easily accessible today is handwaved into existence before the existence of commercial broadband or wireless Internet access. They’ve just got a bunch of desktop computers and video and audio gear set up in the middle of the woods under a plastic tarp without even a generator. Believability and realism are paramount for mockumentaries and found-footage films to work and nothing about this is believable or realistic in the slightest.

As poor as the attention to production detail is, the writing is even worse. Human beings simply do not talk like this. Some example dialogue:

“The magnifying glass of the prosecution’s microscope.” 

“We have found bodies. We don’t know who they are or how many we have found.” 

“I had heard of the Fact or Fiction murders. They were big news for a period of one year, and then like so many things in today’s fast-paced world, were forgotten.” 

“Our job is to eliminate suspects based on the evidence that we sift through and that we gather. And as we sifted through and gathered this evidence there was only one suspect left at the end.” 

“The tapes show a group of men going through a wide range of emotions.” 

This isn’t just stagey, artificially expository language. This is some Ed Wood shit. It makes sense for some of the characters to be inarticulate, but everyone talks this way. 

On top of all of this, the story and packing are clumsy and incoherent. The most violent thing that happens on screen (for most of the film) is a shove and someone half-yelling “I’ll see you at camp, man!” and this is treated as evidence that someone is a homicidal maniac. It’s barely a found-footage film, spending its entire first act in documentary mode setting up the whole situation and making a big deal about the footage they shot, only for us to be shown a few snatches of footage shot in the Pine Barrens, all of it too noisy and degraded to really be understandable (we get two people stumbling on a patch of blood, and some awkward conversation between the four of them, that’s about it) which is a fair amount of buildup for nothing. The third act bounces between the ostensible restoration of the rest of the footage (which even restored is too garbled to make sense of) and a rambling tangent about the nature of truth and how the real Jersey Devil is the media or something, climaxing in an utterly ridiculous non-sequitur of an ending that goes on far too long. There’s a reason this is consigned to historical curiosity.

IMDB entry

Available on Tubi

Available on Amazon

I Corpi Presentano Tracce Di Violenza Carnale: Sex And Violence

For as much lip service as Halloween gets for being the beginning of slasher films, there are any number of films that precede it, and something I’m starting to realize the more I dive into Italian horror is just how much of the prototypical slasher film’s DNA comes from giallo. Sure, it’s a term that encompasses more than just horror, but within the ones most commonly associated with horror, starting with The Bird With The Crystal Plumage, you see what would eventually lead to Halloween and all the dross that came after. And as someone who doesn’t really like slasher films, a lot of the early examples are more interesting in how they don’t hew to a formula (because the formula didn’t exist yet) or bring in elements of other films. 

And to this end, I Corpi Presentano Tracce Di Violenza Carnale (Torso) is a noteworthy addition to the list. It’s an Italian horror film that doesn’t have the visual flair of something like Suspiria or Deep Red, or the gonzo weirdness of something like The Beyond, but acquits itself well and probably works even better now because of a shift in cultural norms.

It opens, as many of these films do, lurid and weird. Someone’s photographing a bunch of women sort of writhing around naked in soft focus. There’s a child’s doll, and a set of fingers comes into frame to gouge out its eyes. So already we have a pretty good idea of what we’re in for. Cut to an art history lecture, and a professor examining the relationship between sacred art and artists who are non-believers. We’re introduced to a number of female students - Flo, Carol, Dani, Katia, Jane and Ursula. It’s coming up on the weekend and they’re making plans. For Flo, “plans” consist of driving to a remote area and making out with a guy.

They did not include a masked figure murdering both of them, but there you go.

The basic structure of the film is as simple as any slasher film - people try to figure out who’s doing all the murders, murders keep happening, often strangulation with a very distinctive-looking scarf, eventually there’s a final reveal and confrontation. The music’s pretty stock, the settings aren’t especially flashy, but it’s well-paced and has, I think, a couple of things going for it. First, intentionally, it makes good use of the trappings of the whodunit. Just when you think you’ve got a particular character nailed as the killer, something comes along to upend that and make you question your own judgment. It’s pretty engaging on that front, and the final reveal feels earned, if not just as melodramatic in its explanation as any other film in the genre. I don’t like thinking of films in terms of “kill scenes,” but I think it handles the requisite scenes well - they’re mostly set-up, and though the violence is sufficiently graphic, it’s not lingering or gratuitous. It gets pretty gnarly at points but you never feel like it’s indulging for the sake of it.

The second thing is, I think, not intentional, but more a factor of the way sensibilities have changed since the 1970s, when this was made. It’s a film that is very much of its time. The original title translates to “the body showed traces of carnal violence” and if I didn’t know better, I’d say this film was key in the inclusion of sexual content in later slasher films. There is lots and lots of gratuitous nudity in this film, starting with the opening credits but by no means ending there. The scenes don’t need it, and it’s lingered upon. It’s strictly directed at the female characters and it’s utterly unapologetic. The camera leers and so do pretty much all of the men in the movie. Like, literally there’s one scene that’s just a bunch of men gawking at a woman. Like, that’s it. Both in how they’re treated visually and in how the male characters talk about them, the women in this film are completely objectified. So right off the bat, there’s something alienating about this film, in the degree to which it is the product of a sensibility you rarely see depicted so blatantly any more. But I think the alienation helps it - we’re presented with a world very different from our own, and that creates a certain atmosphere.

This is further assisted by the nature of the men in the film. With a couple of exceptions, all of the men in the film are creepy to one degree or another. It’s tough to tell how much of it is intentional and how much of it is just because it was an Italian film made in the 1970s. but, as it does in Black Christmas, it adds this uneasy layer to the film - it’s already a hostile atmosphere, and on top of that, pretty much anyone could be the killer. Is it the art professor who hits on Jane and takes a compliment about his eyes really strangely? Is it the student clearly obsessed with Dani, who wears a suspiciously familiar-looking scarf and starts choking a sex worker when she suggests he might be gay? Is it the apparently well-meaning doctor who gives a bunch of them the once-over on a train out of town? Is it the weaselly owner of the newsstand who sells scarves like the one from the killings? Is it one of the two dudes who grope Katia and then try to beat her up when she rejects them? Is it Dani’s uncle, who isn’t above checking her out surreptitiously while she’s just wearing a towel? It could be any of them because they’re all equally complicit in treating women like objects that exist for their pleasure and nothing else. It’s like these women are adrift in a sea of predators because misogyny makes everything a minefield for them.

The first act sets up all the suspects, the second act starts picking people off, and the third brings it home, though interestingly enough, instead of getting more frantic toward the climax, it slows way down and plays most of it as an extended game of cat and mouse, making the big reveal pretty much at the last possible minute. True to the form, there are plenty of cryptic flashbacks, murders performed by a mysterious figure in black leather gloves, the requisite pop-rock soundtrack (chase scenes are never more mellow than they are in films like this), and plenty of blood. There’s strangling, stabbing, eyes getting gouged out, heads getting crushed by a car, the usual, though the violence is far less fetishized in this film than the sex, about which attitudes are as confused as you’d expect - plenty of women traipsing around naked for reasons, dialogue about what this particular man would do to that particular woman, but a scene of the killer peeking in on two women kissing has the kiss itself obscured by a conveniently placed headboard. There’s also an early instance of the Final Girl, predating Halloween by a good five years. It doesn’t hit the most deliriously berserk heights of the form, but it’s also much more coherent and keeps up a good sustained feeling of tension and unease. Nobody and nowhere feels safe in this film.

It is, in some ways, a very workmanlike film. It doesn’t exceed expectations, but there’s also not too much to complain about - there’s one very goofily choreographed fight scene that looks more like a slapfight than anything else, but that’s about it. If you have a low tolerance for men being gross about women, this is not your film, and though it isn’t as transcendent as something like Suspiria or The Beyond, it’s very solid.

IMDB entry

Available on Tubi

Available on Amazon

Don’t Breathe: Yes, Man Is The Real Monster…But Which Man?

Is there any life left in the idea that at the end of the day, it’s humanity that is the monster, not the monsters themselves? I don’t know. It’s pretty well-trod ground at this point. Sometimes it comes at you from a surprising angle, sometimes it feels sort of inevitable, and sometimes it’s so loudly telegraphed that the movie itself is almost beside the point. I don’t think it’s necessarily the weighty revelation that more obvious examples seem to think it is. Yes, people can be fucking terrible. We know.

But that’s not entirely fair, because I think any movie explicitly intended to convey some kind of social message is off to a bad start. More often than not, they end up didactic and tiresome - the cinematic equivalent of someone wagging their finger in your face. But when you don’t center it, when you just make it a part of the movie’s landscape, I think it can still work. And I’m mostly thinking this because Don’t Breathe - which is better than I thought it was going to be, if not as good as it could have been - isn’t afraid to muddy the moral waters a bit across the board.

It's early morning in a quiet Detroit neighborhood. The sun’s lighting the tree-lined streets with gold, and all is quiet, except for the man dragging a body down the middle of the street. Some time before that, a trio of thieves are breaking into a very nice house with a crisp efficiency. Alex times how long they have to get to the alarm and disable it. Rocky dresses up in the owner’s expensive clothes, dreaming of a better life, and Money breaks things and pisses on the carpet. This is how they afford things. They break in, steal stuff, and fence it. Times are hard in Detroit for the kind of people who don’t live in those fancy houses. But it’s getting tougher - Alex insists that they don’t take cash, and stolen goods don’t pay out as well. Money is especially unhappy with this situation, and their fence tips him off to what could be an especially lucrative score. There’s a blind Gulf War veteran who won a big settlement when a wealthy young woman hit his daughter with her car. So there’s this old blind man sitting on a ton of cash - an easy score.

Alex is reluctant to take the job - large amounts of money mean bigger sentences if they get caught and cash means victims aren’t just going to collect the insurance money and call it a day. But Rocky and Money both want to make it happen, and rather than let them run off and get themselves caught, Alex comes along. The house is the only one occupied in one of Detroit’s many ghost neighborhoods - nobody around for a couple of blocks in any direction.

Nobody around to see a man dragging a body down the middle of the street in the early morning.

In the fine tradition of any sort of heist movie, what should be an easy score turns out to be absolutely the farthest thing from it. The old blind military veteran is extremely resourceful and, as it turns out, extremely fucking dangerous. Things turn ugly quick, leading to an extended game of cat and mouse between him and the three intruders who are on his home turf. In a lot of ways, it’s shot and framed more like a monster movie than anything else - the blind man (as he’s named in the credits) is not at all afraid of violence and is more than capable of killing. He moves quietly, sniffing the air like some kind of apex predator, which is disconcerting when it’s an older man in an undershirt moving through the sprawling maze of his house. It’s an appropriately quiet film, with the soundtrack primarily consisting of ambience, generally well-deployed, spiking at the right moments, but letting silence do as much work as you’d expect in a situation where any sound gives away where you are. There are some nice visual touches as well - a lot of it takes place in shadowy interiors, with limited light spilling in an illuminating things just enough. There’s one sequence in total darkness that’s shot as if using light-intensifying cameras, so everything is shades of gray (appropriately enough), almost like a daguerreotype. The action is cut very fine, all about economy of movement and place, the need to be absolutely silent as someone passes within inches of you, so there’s a claustrophobia to it, combined with the slightly nightmare feeling of being trapped in a sprawling, labyrinthine house that seems to keep going in every direction (especially down), as if it doesn’t really end.

It’s an interesting balance, and there’s a nice ticking tension to most of the film made up of near miss after near miss and the thing someone needs being inches away, but those inches being the difference between life and death. As the film winds on, the protagonists discover just what this man is capable of, and it’s so much worse than they could have imagined.

But in other ways, it’s very much not a monster movie. There are humanizing touches to the blind man as well, moments of fear and grief and uncertainty. When he realizes there’s more than one intruder in the house, he’s clearly afraid, as any vulnerable old man on his own would be. He just wants to be left alone, to grieve his lost daughter in his own way, and never did anything to Alex, Rocky or Money except be there and have a lot of money that they wanted to take. He’s done bad things (very bad things, as it turns out), but he’s still a person. And Alex, Rocky, and Money are just people, but they’re capable of bad things. Make no mistake, this film is not a character study - Rocky is the girl who dreams of getting her and her little sister out of their abusive living situation, Alex is the brains of the operation, careful and methodical, and Money is the loose cannon, a wannabe gangster who’s clearly a liability. And that’s pretty much it. And at the end of the day, they have made a decision to rob someone who is, to all appearances, a vulnerable old man, precisely because he seems to be an easy target. They know about his grief and loss, and they don’t care, because it just means he’s sitting on a lot of cash that they want. It’s a tricky proposition to have a film where the protagonists are mostly unsympathetic, but there are some nice twists and reveals that keep everyone involved from being either unambiguously good or bad. Everyone is what they appear to be, but more than that besides, and it does make everything a little more complicated and keeps it from being reduced to a cartoon.

On the other hand, the third act ends up being a bit of a problem. There’s a bunch of unnecessary last-minute exposition, one last-minute reversal after another, and the whole thing feels like it ends maybe three times before it actually does, with some pretty cliched Final Girl stuff at the end. There are som serious implausibilities throughout (like, this is one really resourceful blind man). But again, it’s maybe redeemed a bit by the underlying moral ambiguity of the whole thing. It’s not so much “who will survive and what will be left of them” as it is “who will survive, and what were they made of to begin with.” It manages to take an ending that is in many ways pretty stock for the genre and keep it from feeling like a triumph in any direction. Some people won’t like that, but I’m here for it.

IMDB entry
Available on Tubi
Available on Amazon