Brains, Blood, Boomsticks, & Broods

Happy Schlocko de Mayo as we celebrate the triumphant return of schlockfest. The unanimous group selection this week was the aforementioned Who Can Kill A Child? Originally it was released in the US as Island of the Damned, which meant they chopped about five minutes off of it. Now in a group setting you should be warned WCKAC opens with historical footage of Auschwitz, The Vietnam War, famines in Asia and Africa all showing…. you guessed it…. corpses of children. It can be kind of a buzz kill unless your group is prone to short term memory loss, alcoholism, or could kill a child.

Child Killer…

This opening was of course chopped off for the US release because, well we’re Americans, and we couldn’t have our utopian ideals tampered with. All kidding aside this film is an incredible find. Guillermo Del Torro has cited it as influential on Pan’s Labyrinth. There’s nothing plasticized about any of the characters in the film, and there are some really solid performances by the children. You have to be down for 70s pacing and a few excessive attempts at tension building, but overall there’s not much to dislike about this film (and Jake, Pat, & Jen used the slower moments for a some good ole 70s free love). If you’re looking for a good, fun lovin’ slasher you better look elsewhere, however if you’re looking for some key tie-ins to cinema (think Battle Royale meets Night of the Living Dead, with an emphasis on the psychological factor) then give this one a shot.

Line of the evening: “Are these guys supposed to be British?”

“Of course they are, look at their teeth.”

I’d give this one 4/5 Rotisserie Chickens (as an update some members of schlock were curious why this didn’t make a “5”. The following reasons: excessive non-sequitur genocide sequence, extra 15 minutes of pacing they could have left out, they should’ve killed more kids!)

We’ve been supposed to watch this one for a while. In fact almost every week for three months it’s been on the list as the movie to watch. However, it’s always been supplanted by some other director’s dream that couldn’t gurgle above mediocrity. Fearful that all of the buildup would lead to a massive schlockfest meltdown we went for it.

A Cat in the Brain is Fulci’s homage to…. well, Fulci. And dammit, we at schlockfest like Fulci. We like Fulci so much we laid the burden of saving schlockfest squarely on this director’s shoulders. That’s right, schlockfest has hit a low. With the crap we watch it’s a painful event more akin to a marathon. The greatest reward is being able to say you finished, and for some of us that includes a nap. And the only people you can share your victories with are the ones who endured with you.

The movie opens brilliantly, and then gets stuck in a rut it never emerges from. Collectively we decided the biggest issue with the movie was Fulci actually trying to work within a plot. Normally he operates under the pretense of a plot and takes his movies anywhere he pleases. In this instance he operated under the pretense NO plot and somehow got stuck in one. He used the same scenes over and over and over, and just when you thought he wouldn’t do it again… you get it.

He also took an interesting direction in trying to describe his lack of personal sanity, but he doesn’t really succeed there unless you call his failure a personal triumph as an example of insanity. Have I lost you yet? Good. Because that’s the mindset you need to be in to watch this one. It was by far the weakest effort of the three Fulci movies we’ve watched. The other problem I think is that you’re watching a director of a niche genre make reference to his whole catalog of niche films. (Something along the lines of Horror>Foreign Horror>Foreign Horror Schlock>Foreign Horror Schlock Directors>Personal catalogs of that directors films) Though if that’s the case it would be our fault for not watching more Fulci movies…. and I guess that’s a good place to leave it: A Cat in the Brain is for the extremely well seasoned Fulci watcher, hold off until you know all his children by name and what his grandfather’s favorite vineyard is.

What it has: that damn guy with a chainsaw, a cat eating a brain, hypnosis, a piano wire, a really great trailer, token eye scene, gore, and psychosis

What it’s missing: Well… like any good fulci film it has almost everything, even fulci himself

Be warned… it’s a lot slower than the trailer… and wait till you have a few other Fulci’s under your belt.

2.5/5 metronomes

Schlock is conducive to creating an adage about high expectations, and The Burrowers served as a prime example. Well the first thing is: it certainly isn’t schlock. However, we adjusted, switched mindsets and hunkered down for what was a highly recommended flick. All of us in the room, mind you, are not only horror fans, but Western junkies as well. What could be better? Last week: sheep meet zombies, this week: John Wayne takes on the undead…

... but she's so cold, pa.

Except it didn’t really come together that way. It was the quietest schlock night we’ve had in a while. There wasn’t a tremendous amount to laugh at, the scares were nonexistent and the cinematography was there, but nothing amazing. When it was all said and done and the credits were rolling Jude summed it up best with”It was a mediocre western, a mediocre horror, and the sum of it’s parts was less than…” Less than what?! But like the wise sage that he is, he had already disappeared before we could ask.

If you think it’s a flick for you:  you’ll get just as much enjoyment out of it by yourself as you would with a group. Save it for a night when you have nothing else to do.

What it has: racial tensions, people on horses, people underneath the ground, people on horses riding across open fields, people in uniforms chasing people underground, evil people (mainly the one’s on horses, in uniforms, chasing the people underground), native people, and finally that “oh shit, you showed us the monster moment”

What it’s missing: some singularly badass protagonist that makes it a western worth watching; aliens; spaceships; a cool reason for the burrowers other than the tired, cliched one we always get; a Penelope Cruz intermission

As you can see there was nothing here that blew us away, and there was really nothing to hate. All in all we were just a bit indifferent.

2/5 translation errors

I’ve been lazy. I haven’t been writing, but that doesn’t mean I haven’t been watching. Black Sheep, not the Chris Farley movie from the 90s, is one of my favorites. It’s like going home to chicken fried steak, mashed potatoes/gravy and creamed corn. It’s all you could ever want, and you leave satisfied. It also gives me hope that amazing horror comedy can still be made.

So it’s no surprise that when I had a group of nonschlockers over wanting to have a good time I pulled this one off the shelf. Why else? Because by the end of the movie 6/7 people spent the whole movie laughing, and the seventh person spent the whole movie hiding behind a pillow squealing with fear from the zombie sheep. Oh, that’s right, zombie sheep.

The movie takes one of the more humanist countries, gives them  greedy capitalists, and pits them against the most fearful herbivores to ever munch grass. And if that’s not enough of a plot (at least by schlock standards) it goes everywhere a sheep movie can go, everywhere. And while it goes there, it looks really good. Weta Workshops did the special effects (same company that did Lord of the Rings).

But enough babbling, here’s what it has: zombie sheep, methane gas, golden shear awards, Experience, hippies, International investors, Frau fetish scientist, cattle dog, acupuncture, evil older brothers, and a genetically altered wool sheep’s coat guaranteed to be softer when you grab it from the sides

What it’s missing: anybody you’ll recognize, the Fiords, neighbors, or cows

I’m sure you’ve already seen it, but in case you haven’t…

5/5 Baaaaaas at the moon

Maybe I’m reacting to the hype. Maybe I’m a bad critic. Or just maybe the camera was shaking so freaking much I was always cognizant of the fact I was watching a bad movie. (Don’t hate me cause I’m honest.) I’m not going to sit here and pick it apart, but c’mon, your premise is that a news crew is filming this entire event. Why does it need to look like you strapped the camera to the back of a gorilla and threw bananas against the wall. I saw Cloverfield, I can hang, but this was simply too much. I was never able to divest myself from the fact I was staring at a shaking image, and because of that there were no scares or thrills, only a lot of eyerubbing.

Funny, Scary, or... "Jake. Wake Up!"

Then there was the plot. There are throngs of forums of people ready to make love to this film and declare it the Citizen Kane of horror. Why? The story wasn’t new. The acting was typical. And decisions by the characters were bland. No one broke a window; did something morally deprave; hell, even the source of the virus was given deniable plausibility by trying to do the right thing in God’s eyes. There were plenty of opportunities for these questionable acts to happen. For instance when we’re watching the Health Inspector through the window, but even this scene makes the conspiracy fall apart. He was just trying to do the right thing!

All this said, it wasn’t the worst movie I’ve ever seen or even truly bad. [REC] just really rubbed me the wrong way because of all the hype. It doesn’t live up. If you were a child in the 90s and missed Blair Witch Project and saw this in the theatres… maybe I get it? However, it fails itself on so many levels it’s frustrating. Why doesn’t anyone go crazy and do something irrational? Why do TV sets still work when the power in the building is out? Why? Why? Why? I’ll stop. Hell, watch it. Everyone else seems to be in love with it, but I’m not enamored.

What it’s got: Fast zombies, Old ladies in panties, Graphic bite wounds, A tailor shop with stretchers, A cameraman with DT’s, Plastic drapes, a dumbass health inspector, religious overtones, rabid dogs, angry children, an introduction whose sole purpose was to push this into 80 minute range

What it’s missing: a reason for the hype, a working cure, pyrotechnics, a budget (but I’m cool with that), a reason why we’re watching it in the first place (not sarcastically, but plot wise), any moral ambiguity in the character’s actions

Lower your expectations, turn on the dubbing, enjoy the show?

2/5 Festival Awards

I guess I’m on a bit of a remake kick in my personal time, and please don’t think less of me. This week I took one for the team and watched the Day of the Dead remake that went straight to DVD. I’ve said before I don’t make comparisons to the original, and I won’t make any exception here (there are that many synonyms for abomination).

"Pretty please with sugar on top may I act like a badass?"

Truthfully though… it wasn’t terrible, but it wasn’t good either. I’m wondering if Mena Suvari is considering a claim that a body double played the whole role for her. Maybe it was a fun side project, but definitely not a step up. Ving Rhames also shows up in this Romero remake, but he’s not as ass kickingly cool as he was in the Dawn of the Dead from 2004.

****Next Paragraph is a vague spoiler section (not really much to spoil though) skip to the ***** if you want to miss it

Typical story, follows most traditional/remake horror rules: black people don’t fare so well, teenagers who have sex don’t do so well unless you’re of relation to the protagonist, and government agents and their conspiracies get there due

*****************************

The zombies are freakin’ weird with some heavy hands on the CGI and excessive speeding of sequences in the editing room. It’s probably a taste thing, but the pacing just didn’t work. It’s a Romero concept with 28 Days Later zombies. I had a hard time visually digesting that one. The makeup was nice, though rushed in parts, which is probably the biggest asset the movie has to offer. (Trust me, you’re not flipping this one on because of the plot).

I did end up rooting for Nick Cannon’s character Salazar a lot simply because he has some of the best kills in the movie. There are some nice (don’t read great) special effects sequences. Absolutely nothing is here for the brain though, and if you are a die hard Romero fan skip it, you’ll probably end up pulling your eyeball out and eating it before the movies over.

What it’s got: Fast zombies, big budget, massive flame thrower, evil scientist genius, a lot of driving (how big is this small town anyway?), intelligent zombies (oxymoron?), a plot that was written while sniffing glue, government conspiracies (surprise!), a bizarre sequence where the town substation blows the whole town blacks out and then mysteriously regains power, and a blu-ray release (really?!?!)

What it’s missing: the scene where Ving Rhames is castrated (wtf?), respect for parents, decent burials, a lack of residue after burning, helicopters (c’mon where are the helicopters?), trigger locks in gun shops, acting

No surprises here. You want to watch zombies. You get to watch zombies. Would I pick it up over say re-watching 28 Days, the original Day of the Dead, or an episode of Lassie? Probably not, but it wasn’t painful.

2/5 zip ties

Hey. What’s that stuff movies used to have back in the day? Oh that’s right, plot. And this movie is just what Schlock Night needed to continue breathing life into what was becoming a weekly buildup of apprehension. Who knows maybe after this week we’ll be off life support.

On the cover The Living Dead at Manchester Morgue is described as the best zombie movie ever made. A tall order by anyone’s standards. Does it deserve to be called the best? I may not go that far, but it definitely wins in some aspects. And what was that? It’s Italian title was what? Yup. Zombi 3. So how does Zombi 3 fall into the great lineage of  Romero and Fulci when it actually predates both “Zombi” features. I won’t delve into the tedium. It wouldn’t be schlocky of me, but if you’re interested visit this site (and thank Jude for finding it).

What made this movie successful? Is it too cliche to say it had heart? Maybe at times it even loves Night of the Living Dead so much it becomes predictable, but you enjoy the ride nonetheless. It’s characters are memorable and the zombie attacks are ludicrously hysterical. While it does push a little bit of gore factor it definitely won’t appeal to the torture porn enthusiasts. However, it will resonate with high brow movie connoisseur and old school horror enthusiasts alike. You really can’t go wrong here.

What it has: A streaker, dubbing, one of the more memorable zombies of all time, intelligent zombies (they exist now), ultrasonic radiation (yup, that exists too), heroin, skeptical police, cars Jake would die for, and an excellent elevator scene

What it’s missing: an abundance of sound, tolerance for authority, excessive gore, a reason to pass up on this classic

Though it nears perfection I can’t say it’s the best or perfect, but it’s damn close.

4.5/5 radioactive, cannibalistic ants