Mad Monster Party (1967) Review

Director: Jules Bass
Stars: Boris Karloff, Allen Swift, Gale Garnett, Phyllis Diller
Genre: Family, Musical, Horror

What a perfect film to watch for the Halloween season. It's from Rankin/Bass Productions, the same guys that did those stop-motion Christmas films, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer and Frosty the Snowman. Mad Monster Party was their take on Halloween, and though it's not a very popular film, it frequently comes up in horror fan's favorites.

In this film, for some reason, Doctor Frankenstein is the leader of all the monsters. I have no idea why...but he is. He is voiced by legendary horror star, Boris Karloff, so I suppose it kind of makes sense. Yes, that's right, legendary horror star Boris Karloff is in this. 

Anyway, Doctor Frankenstein wants to retire his leadership, and he wants to let his nephew, who knows nothing of his experiments and dealings with monsters, take over as leader. So he gathers all his monster friends to his castle, and I do mean all of them. There's Dracula, The Wolf Man, The Mummy, The Invisible Man, Frankenstein's monster, Bride of Frankenstein, Quasimodo, The Creature, Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, and even a King Kong-like creature. Oh, there's also a caricature of Peter Lorre in here, which imitates his appearance and voice. Pretty damn cool.

But, all the monsters don't like the idea of Doctor Frankenstein's nephew taking over, as they all feel the spot is rightfully their own. So what do the monsters do? Well, they try to kill his nephew of course. It's quite a good plot for a film of this nature, and it has a pretty satisfying and intense ending as well.

The animation looks pretty good but what will really stand out is the set design. It is wonderfully creepy, from the dark swamps to the gothic interiors of the castle. It's a great atmosphere and nails the Halloween/Gothic Horror feel perfectly. The theme and atmosphere are definitely one of the film's strongest points. Each scene is beautiful.

Plus there's an extremely well done and highly memorable soundtrack. And I'm not just talking about the musical song-and-dance parts, the mood setting background music is what really did it for me. The actual songs the monsters sung were alright too, though I've never been much of a fan of musicals. They had a very '60s feel to them, and they were superb, but they kind of didn't fit with the feel of the film.

This film's visual style was actually a direct influence for many of Tim Burton's animated films (Vincent, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Frankenweenie), so any fans of his will probably enjoy this.

The humor here is actually pretty funny. There is some adult humor, and it really is a film that can be enjoyed by all ages. I even laughed out loud a few times. The part I found the funniest, whether it was intentional or not, was when the nephew smacked the girl and then she fell in love with him. It was just so absurd. The script was actually penned by Harvey Kurtzman, the creator of MAD Magazine, so of course you'll get a few laughs.

If I have any complaints it's that some of the monsters didn't get enough screen time. The Creature was hardly shown at all, as with the Invisible Man. The film really focused mostly on Dracula, which I suppose is as good a monster as any to focus on. Just wish some of the monsters didn't feel completely pointless. But it is great seeing all the Universal Monsters on screen, and this film doesn't desecrate the characters like some films, but it rather honors them. Although, I will say that the Bride of Frankenstein was kind of annoying, though she was voiced by the talented Phyllis Diller. Francesca, an original character to the film, who played the femme fatale role, was actually surprisingly enjoyable.

A superb holiday film for the family, with all your favorite monsters and some great visuals and atmosphere. Quite funny at times, and quite enjoyable overall.  

Purchase Mad Monster Party: Blu-Ray/DVD - Stream

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) Review

Director: Robert Wiene
Stars: Werner Krauss, Conrad Veidt, Lil Dagover
Genre: Mystery, Horror, Expressionism

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari was one of the most important films of the silent era, not only to German expressionist films, but films in general, at the time and for all future films to come.

The plot follows Dr. Caligari and his somnambulist, Cesare, a man he has under hypnosis. Caligari has Cesare as an exhibition at a local fair, and claims that he can see into anyone's future. A man asks Cesare how long he has to live and Cesare tells him until dawn tomorrow. Tomorrow at dawn Dr. Caligari commands Cesare to go and kill the man, which he does. Dr. Caligari is then subject to investigation by many of the town's residents.

As the film progresses we learn some of Caligari's motives, and Cesare's inability to murder that which is beautiful. There are a few twists throughout the plot and this film is noted as having the first twist ending in cinema. That's a pretty big first if you ask me, though I suppose it was an inevitable first as novels have had twist endings for quite a while. It's also one of the first films to use a frame story (story within a story), and is one of the finest examples of German expressionism.

The sets are really the highlight here, almost theatrical in appearance. Twisted hallways, slanted windows, crooked doorways, all make a very surreal atmosphere, all complimented with great use of lighting and shadows, making for a wonderfully twisted and Gothic film. 

This is perhaps one of the most stylish films ever, something I think many newer films tend to ignore. Written by Hans Janowitz and Carl Mayer who believed cinema to be a new medium for artistic expression and believed it was something that required not only cameramen, actors, and directors, but also writers and painters. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is often considered one of the first art films, and arguable even the first cult film, playing for nearly a decade straight at a theatre in Paris during the '20s.

Said to be an allegory for war, which makes sense being that both writers were soldiers in the, at the time, very recent World War I. Dr. Caligari sends out his servant to do his killings just as governments send out their people to do theirs.

The soundtrack to the one I've watched (I've watched this about half a dozen times and I've only seen one version with a different soundtrack) which I believe is the original, is actually very suiting to the film. I've watched many silent films where the music seemed to be there simply as filler. But the sound here greatly compliments what is occurring on screen. 

The film was directed by Robert Wiene, and he is generally only recognized for this film, but he went on to direct some more German expressionist films, two notable ones being Genuine: A Tale of a Vampire and The Hands of Orlac, both horror films and both very decent films though I wouldn't call them as good as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.

A fine example of early horror but it's not really scary. It can be creepy at times and I'm sure time hasn't done it much good, but it really plays out more like a mystery, but it definitely has many horror elements and though The Hunchback of Notre Dame is widely regarded as the film that set the mold for many horror films, it seems as The Hunchback of Notre Dame may have been influenced by this.

A necessary viewing for any fan of horror, German expressionism, silent films, or even just students of film in general.

Recommended for: fans of German Expressionism, students of cinema

Purchase The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari: DVD

V/H/S (2012) Review

Directors: Adam Wingard, David Bruckner, Ti West, Glenn McQuaid, Joe Swanberg, Radio Silence
Genre: Horror

V/H/S is a found footage anthology horror film with five different stories and one overlapping story, each by different directors. I will review each segment individually and then give a final conclusion of the film as a whole.

Tape 56
Tape 56 is the main story line that continues in-between each short segment. There's really not much to it, it's about some assholes who are hired to rob a VHS tape from a house, no reason given as to why or what was on the tape, just that they would "know it when they see it". They break into the house and they find a dead guy sitting in a chair in front of static television sets. There are dozens of tapes around the house and they check all the tapes in the VHS player, which serves as the means to showing us each segment.

Nothing else really happens and there is virtually no conclusion. The plot is almost non-existent and we're never satisfied with a conclusion or anything. This really only exists to show us the five shorts, but it would have been nice if it had a bit more substance to it.

Amateur Night
This is the first tape they play. It's about three douche-bag guys who go out and pick up girls and plan to record a porno with their spy camera glasses. Yeah, those type of guys. However, things go wrong when one of the girls turns out to be a demon Succubus, who proceeds in brutally ripping apart the three guys. It was pretty great watching those douche bags die.

I'd say that this is one of my favorite of the five. It's stylishly the best, with creepy imagery of the succubus standing in the hotel room with her hands over her head, while we only really see her silhouette in the darkness. It's all very cool and the effects were done pretty well. The end was...eh, it was suffice enough.

Second Honeymoon
The second tape is about a couple on their honeymoon and their stay in a hotel room. The wife records just about everything as a memento. They encounter an odd woman who knocks on their door and later, while both are asleep, there is an unknown person recording them as they sleep. The next night they do it again, this time taking out a switchblade and stabbing the husband in the neck. Then there's a kind of dumb twist at the end.

This one was probably the most suspenseful of the lot, and the shot with the switchblade reminded me of something you'd see in a Dario Argento film. Besides that it's pretty dull and nothing really happens. The suspense never really goes anywhere and the ending isn't too satisfying.

Tuesday the 17th
This one is about four friends who go out to the woods together, only to be hunted down by a killer who you can only see through a camera, and even then is very glitchy and blurry. It's basically a typical slasher story, and the director knows it, hence the name.

This one wasn't bad, but like all slashers it started out pretty scary but by the end it became a bit typical. The killer was kind of cool, kind of reminded me of MarbleHornets with the whole technology thing. It was enjoyable though and the brunette girl was pretty damn creepy.

The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger
I can't really explain the plot too much here due to spoilers, but it's about a girl who talks to her boyfriend through webcam and she believes that her apartment is haunted and she sees ghosts every night.

I actually really liked the plot of this one, it's probably the best one. [Quick spoiler here] it involves alien breeding and weird shit like that. Unfortunately the delivery wasn't too great and it felt like I was watching...Paranormal Activity or something. Still cool though.

10/31/98
This is the last tape. It follows four friends who try and go to a Halloween party, dressed as a marine, a nanny cam, a pirate, and one guy was dressed as the fucking Unabomber. Awesome! When they arrive at the house it's empty but there are some very supernatural things going on. At first the group believes it is a haunted house that was set up for the party, but they soon find out otherwise. They run into a group of men beating a bondaged woman and they save her, but she isn't exactly what she appears to be.

This one and the first one are probably my two favorites. This one doesn't really do anything new, but it's fun as hell and even funny at some points (just like the first one). This one was directed by Chad, Matt & Rob, the guys who run the very popular YouTube channel, well known for their scary prank videos.

Conclusion
It's definitely a fun ride. It's nearly two hours long but it goes by pretty fast in the first viewing, however I could see it being pretty boring on a re-watch. V/H/S doesn't really do anything new or unique, it doesn't even tell a semi-decent story, but it is fun, and scary at times, and even funny. A lot of the scares are cheap but there's some genuinely well-crafted scares too. The acting is good enough, and it stars all unknown actors which adds to the effect that the shorts are real.

It seems all the shorts did their best to avoid many found footage conventions, i.e., shaky cam running in Blair Witch Project. And it actually does a good job at this, avoiding most of the things many people hate about found footage films. A fun, mindless ride. One of the better found footage films, especially recently.

Recommended for: fans of found footage or horror anthologies

Purchase V/H/S on Amazon: Blu-Ray - DVD - Stream

Frankenweenie (2012) Review

Director: Tim Burton
Stars: Winona Ryder, Charlie Tahan, Catherine O'Hara, Martin Short, Martin Landau
Genre: Family, Horror, Comedy

Tim Burton's remake of his own 1984 short film of the same name. Not only is this film the first completely black and white film to be shot in IMAX 3D, it is also the first stop-motion one.

It's a re-telling of the Frankenstein story, parodying and paying homage to, about a boy whose dog dies and he then brings back to life with electricity. It's really that simple.

The main character, Victor, plays the part of Doctor Frankenstein, his dog plays the role of Frankenstein's monster, the neighbor's dog plays the part of the Bride of Frankenstein, Edgar Gore is kind of like Igor, and the teacher, to me, reminded me of Vincent Price for some reason.

We have some great actors in here lending their voices, most notable being Winona Ryder, Catherine O'Hara, Martin Short, and Martin Landau. Unfortunately all the voices in here felt pretty monotone and flat to me. I can only guess that this was done purposefully, being that usually these actors are very engaging, maybe to add to the atmosphere or something. To me, it didn't work out so well. It makes all the characters seem very boring and lifeless, which works in only a few scenes, but hurts the film overall. Plus, the dull voices fail to engage the viewer and leaves them bored. Even Edgar Gore, who has a fairly unique voice, sounds kind of dull.

All the characters are good enough, the voices make them a bit forgettable. I liked the teacher, and even Victor. The dog, Sparky, was very lovable, a welcomed improvement from the original short. At parts I even got a little teary eyed, but I have a pretty big soft spot for boy and dog stories.

The film is in black and white, which compliments the atmosphere wonderfully. I couldn't see this film working in color, not as well at least. The film does manage to have a great Gothic theme, and I times evokes feelings of hate, sympathy, sadness, love, hope, hopelessness, etc. So, in that respect, it does a great job. I must also compliment the subtle 3D used rather than gimmicky 3D.

To me, the original short had a better atmosphere. It fused the Gothic world and the suburban world perfectly. While this remake really doesn't do that as well, though it does to an extent. The first short has a very suburban '70s feels to it, and one that made us all feel at home, but it also had a dark and Gothic theme alongside it.

The stop-motion is superb, on par with if not surpassing the stop-motion from this year's earlier ParaNorman. It really is very visually pleasing.

Towards the end of the film things get a bit action packed, with giant sea-monkeys and a kaiju sized turtle that looks an awful lot like Gamera.

I won't spoil anything, but I was disappointed by the ending. Not that I didn't know how it would end, being that I watched the original short. It's just the ending worked better in the short because it presented a different moral, the moral of acceptance and not fearing the unknown. In here, due to the rest of the film, the moral comes out a bit different and the moral presented in the short is not as prominent here. Instead it just feels like a typical happy family ending with no substance. Which leads me to say that this remake should have focused a bit more on the townspeople's fear of Sparky. After all, that is the tale of Frankenstein, is it not? And though I am somewhat saddened to say it, I think (SPOILER) Sparky should have died in the end of this one. It would have been a much more powerful ending, and it would have worked on many more moral viewpoints.

Oh, and at one point in the film the family is watching Chistopher Lee's Dracula. Kind of funny that they went with a Hammer Horror film rather than a Universal Monsters one, being that this film is based on Universal's Frankenstein.

This is one of Tim Burton's better recent films, not his best work, but much better than, let's say, Alice in Wonderland. It's the type of film we've come to expect from Burton. It's a fun film, worth watching. It's hard for me to imagine someone genuinely hating this. A somewhat unnecessary remake, but an enjoyable one. Great for the family.

Pros:

+Good atmosphere

+Visually superb

+Manages to evoke numerous emotions

Cons:

-Dull voice acting

-Boring ending

-Somewhat unnecessary remake

-Doesn't do anything highly original

Purchase Frankenweenie on Amazon: Blu-Ray - DVD 

Night of the Living Dead (1968) Review

Director: George A. Romero
Stars: Duane Jones, Judith O'Dea, Karl Hardman
Genre: Horror

Night of the Living Dead is one of the most important films in the genre. Not only did it set the standard and the mold for all future zombie films, it also pushed independent film-making and gore to new limits, and managed to define an era all at the same time.

The film follows a group of people who take shelter in a farmhouse in an attempt to protect themselves from walking corpses who have rose from their graves.

It's a very simple story, and it almost completely takes place inside of one house, which greatly contributes to the film's claustrophobic feel. The film was shot independently on a low-budget, but that only helped the film. The black and white makes the film feel more gritty and hopeless, in a noir sort of way. The film, on its surface, is most definitely minimalism in just about every aspect, but beneath its surface there is plenty to be dissected and interpreted.

Analyzed by many viewers, critics, historians, etc, there have been many explanations to the messages behind Night of the Living Dead. It has been suggested that the zombies are a metaphor for capitalists or racists, among many others, or that the whole film is a statement on racism or on consumer culture. Many draw comparisons between this film and the war in Vietnam. I believe a certain level of truth holds true for most all interpretations. I have my own subjective interpretation, as I'm sure most people do. When it comes down to it though, the zombies are us, the darker side of us all.

The zombies in here, which are never actually even referred to as zombies in the film, aren't too scary. They definitely don't feel awfully threatening. For most of the film they just linger about outside the house, taking their sweet time in actually getting to the house. The real horror, the real threat is the people inside the house. It is, in the end, themselves that destroy each other. It is not a film about flesh eaters, that's not the film's focus, the film is about the people's reactions to the zombies and their psychology not just in dealing with the epidemic at hand, but their personalities overall. 

All of the actors were, and are, unknown actors who never really acted in anything else. This contributes to the feel of realism and documentary-esque atmosphere. They aren't terribly good actors, that's obvious, and most of their lines were improvisational, but it all fuels the film's feel of average, everyday people in a horrific situation, and even though their acting isn't great, this actually helps us to relate to them and their characters are so believable we feel like we've met them before.

The film's main protagonist is a black man named Ben. It wasn't typical for a film, at the time, to cast a black man as the lead role, something that makes the film even more symbolic and powerful. Ben is stuck in a house with a bunch of mostly incompetent white people, the bigot Harry, the delusional and traumatized Barbra, and forced to try and survive it. (Perhaps an obvious statement on racial affairs?)

In the end (spoilers by the way) Ben is the only one to survive. Not only was it the zombies he survived, but he also survived the others who were in the house. The power struggle between him and Harry for example. But, int he film's final sequence, Ben is shot through the window by 'rescuers' who, we can only assume, thought he was a zombie. Perhaps they knew he was not a zombie, but actually just a black man. The rescuers did approach in a mob-like fashion, and were all rednecks. Not to mention the grainy images at the end had a very newspaper lynching look to them. An idea that resonated with many viewers at the time, being right after the Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. assassinations.

Ben, who was the smartest and best organized character, was not without flaws of his own. We see him lose it a few times and see him act in questionable ways. In fact all the characters are well developed and have pros and cons to their personalities. It's not whether or not we can survive a zombie attack, it's whether or not we can survive ourselves. 

The way I see it is the film's main message is that people die randomly and without good reason. There is no greater good. A very nihilistic message indeed.

One of Night of the Living Dead's best achievements is the fact that it's a B-movie, from more than 40 years ago, without any camp or cheesy-ness. Something that is hard to say for many films of similar nature.

Night of the Living Dead, though it set the mold for all future zombie films and changed the genre greatly, isn't really completely original. Many call it a rip-off of Richard Matheson's 1954 novel, I Am Legend. Which it is true Night of the Living Dead is essentially based on, as George Romero has admitted. But hell, this type of zombie has been around since horror comics of the '50s, or even arguably since H.P. Lovecraft's Reanimator in the '20s. So no, George Romero didn't create the zombie we all know and love, but he definitely streamlined it and did a great job with it.

But I wouldn't call Night of the Living Dead a rip-off by any standards. It has its own style and artistic merit, and it is unique in its own right. Not to mention all the good it's done for films in general.

It's honestly hard for me to review Night of the Living Dead, it's just so good and my head hurts trying to do justice in explaining what makes it so.

Night of the Living Dead challenges capitalism, racism, and countless other various social and governmental problems. It presents a bleak message that doesn't hold back. A film that set the standard for zombie films and pushed the horror genre to new limits, all while creating a dark, chilling atmosphere, complete with feelings of claustrophobia, hopelessness, or even paranoia which is reflected in the twisted camera angles and  haunting imagery. An atmosphere filled with believable and thought-out characters, dealing with the psychology of each beautifully. A great example of independent horror done right. 

One of the best zombie films ever made, and one of the most realistic horror films of all time, which is what makes it so scary. A horror film set not in Transylvania, but in Pennsylvania, not with monsters of imagination, but with the monsters within ourselves. 

Sequels: Dawn of the Dead (1978), Day of the Dead (1985)

Purchase Night of the Living Dead on Amazon: Blu-Ray - DVD - Stream