Meatcleaver Massacre (1977)

AKA: "Hollywood Meatcleaver Massacre" and "Morak"

Directed by: Evan Lee

Starring: Christopher Lee, Larry Justin, J. Arthur Craig, James Habif, Robert Clark, Bob Mead, and Doug Senior

Rated: R

Genre: Horror, Slasher, Supernatural

There has been an attack on the Cantrell home. Home invaders have severely injured Professor Cantrell and murdered the rest of his family. Now, the professor and acclaimed occult researcher lies unconscious in a hospital bed, his soul summoning an ancient demon, Morak the Avenger, to bring justice down upon the perpetrators. He knows who they are, and they will pay with their lives.

The title of this film is very misleading. There are no deaths related to a meat cleaver. In fact, there aren’t really any interesting deaths at all. There is no gore to speak of, and the violence happens so quickly, the viewer isn’t even sure what is happening. When we are dealing with characters as despicable as the guys in this film, the deaths should be long, drawn out, creative, and gory, not blink-and-you-miss-it or leaving you wondering what just happened.

The editing is very choppy, jumping around sporadically throughout a scene, and often splicing two different scenes together, confusing the viewer. For example: we see Dirk slam against a mirror, bleeding (orangey colored blood!), then we see him sitting in a chair lost in thought, then we’re back to him and the bloody mirror, then the chair again. Then there’s the whole scene where Dirk is contemplating suicide, about to slit his wrist, then realizes he’s late for work, so he decides against it. Really? Couldn’t we have left that ridiculous scene out? Did it do anything for the story?

The lighting in the film is terrible. There are many scenes, especially when a death is about to occur, and the entire climax, where it is hard to see anything at all. It was difficult to discern what actually happened in the final moments of the climax, I’m still not entirely sure about the events that unfolded.

It is really hard to get into a film when you don’t like the characters. The only decent one is the Professor, everyone else is either annoying, disgusting or boring. I can’t feel scared for characters I do not care about. I felt the home invasion could have been a very suspenseful, intense scene, but the film plows on through it, leaving the viewer thinking, “Well, that happened.” Those were characters the audience could have gotten behind and rooted for, but instead we don’t even know their names. Meanwhile, the audience is subjected to the annoying repartee of Sean, Dirk, Phil and Mason, the morons behind the Cantrell murders – and don’t even get the satisfaction of seeing them die brutally.

The only thing this film has going for it is the appearance of horror legend, Christopher Lee, bookending the crappy schlock. Lee discusses interesting supernatural occurrences that slightly relate to what the professor was teaching in class. These anecdotes are more interesting than anything else the flick has to offer. I’m not sure why such a legend would appear in such bland dreck, but even he could not save it.

Overall, this is a boring supernatural slasher with unlikable characters and terrible lighting and editing. It’s not worth your time.

3/10

Silent Madness (1984)

Directed by: Simon Nuchtern

Starring: Belinda Montgomery, David Greenan, Tori Hartman, Katie Bull, Katherine Kamhi, Sydney Lassick and Viveca Lindfors, cameo by Paul DeAngelo

Genre: Horror, Slasher

Rated: R

Due to a computer error, dangerous mental patient, Howard Johns, is released from the hospital. Doctor Joan Gilmore discovers this error, and upon bringing it to the attention of her senior staff members, realizes they’re trying to cover it up. Gilmore takes it upon herself to find Johns, hoping to stop him before he returns to the scene of his crimes and begins to recreate them.

I really liked that the “survivor girl” role was filled not by a teenager, but by a professional woman with a good head on her shoulders. Joan Gilmore is a great heroine for this film – she’s tough, stands her ground, and is willing to fight for what she believes is right, even if no one else believes her. She’s a licensed psychiatrist and cares deeply about all of her patients, even the violent ones that have to be chemically restrained. She is also willing to risk her own life to help the girls she believes Johns will be targeting. She may meet a love interest on the way, but she is her own being and she continues to prove herself despite the misogyny she faces in the work place and on her quest to stop Johns from returning to where it all began.

The other characters are pretty unmemorable – some simply introduced only a split second before getting killed off. (Ex: Barbara, the skateboarding girl). Joan focuses her time on the three girls still home for spring break – Pam, Cheryl and Jane (Sleepaway Camp’s Katherine Kamhi). These girls really don’t have much personality, and I honestly didn’t care whether she was able to save them or not. Joan’s love interest, Mark, is the only other character I found myself rooting for. He also happened to be the only male in the film’s population that could respect a woman and work alongside her without treating her like she was inferior or a sex object.

I did like how the film explored the territory of the working woman. In the 1980s, more women were leaving the home and entering the workplace, becoming career women rather than housewives. It was really nice to see the heroine of this film being a professional, better yet, a doctor, and having her boss also be a woman. Joan also proves to be motherly as well as career driven, so the film drives out the idea that women can’t be both. We also see her deal with the blatant misogyny from her male peers and the males that work beneath her. She proves herself to these sleazebags every day, and won’t allow them to tell her she’s wrong when her gut tells her she’s not.

Of course, if the film’s protagonist can almost be seen as a feminist character, it has to be balanced out with a little T&A from the sorority sisters. At least three pairs of breasts are shown, as to be expected from a cheesy ‘80s slasher. It’s just a bummer that the film falls back on lame clichés when they have such a progressive heroine. Breasts are shown, “slutty” girls killed, virginal girls survive. I guess I can’t ask for too much.

The kills were a disappointment. They are all pretty bloodless and most of them happen off screen. The viewer gets the basic gist of what’s happening to the victim, but no real thrill in the suspense or the gore. Most of the kills happen very quickly, giving the viewer little to no time to worry for the intended victim, and even less for the victim to fight back. The only suspenseful scenes involve the final chase between Joan and Johns. She is likable and she is a fighter. I didn’t want anything to happen to her.

The plot itself has been done – mental patient gets out of the hospital and returns home to kill again. It was done in Halloween, and I’m sure even before that. It is also fairly predictable. I did, however, really like the hospital cover-up angle the film took, proving that those Joan works for may be just as dangerous as the man she is trying to bring back into custody.

Overall, this is a pretty tame slasher. The kills are rather boring and bloodless, the plot predictable, but the heroine is great. I’d like to see more characters like her in horror.

5/10

Beautiful Creatures (2013)

Directed by: Richard LaGravenese

Starring: Alden Ehrenreich, Alice Englert, Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, Emmy Rossum, Thomas Mann, Emma Thompson and Kyle Gallner

Genre: Teen, Drama, Romance, Supernatural

Rated: PG-13

Based on the novel by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl

Ethan Wate thinks it’s just going to be another boring school year in Gatlin, South Carolina, dealing with the same old people and same dull events as always. Then he meets Lena Duchannes, the new girl in school, and can’t keep himself away from her. As the two grow closer, secrets are revealed, and Ethan learns more about his family, Gatlin, and the world than he ever thought possible.

I have mixed feelings about this film. In my attempt to decide my final verdict, I will lay down a list of what I did and didn’t like about it.

What I did like:
The Acting: When I first watched the trailer, I wasn’t sure how I felt about Alden Ehrenreich as the leading man, but I ended up falling in love with him. He was sweet and charming, determined as well as vulnerable, all wrapped up in an adorably awkward package. He brought Ethan to life. Englert wasn’t bad as Lena either, giving her a strength that she didn’t have in the novel. She and Ehrenreich also seemed to share a natural chemistry, which helped me care about them as a couple. Jeremy Irons was everything I expected Macon Ravenwood to be – tall, well-spoken, and sophisticated. Emmy Rossum was another actor I wasn’t sure of – especially since she’s radically different from the Ridley in the novel, but for the film’s version she does her job well. Emma Thompson stands out the most, jumping from crazy bigoted church lady to the delightfully evil Sarafine with such ease. She seemed to have a lot of fun with the character and it showed in her performance.
The Cinematography: The backdrop for this film was beautiful. It really felt like the South, with the old plantation houses, ancient trees covered in Spanish Moss, and small town charm. The Castor sets were beautiful, with Ravenwood Manor being elegant and stylish and the Castor Library having an antique feel.
The Special Effects: While they are CGI, they are done well and very imaginative. I loved the spinning dining table, the appearance of writing in The Book of Moons, and the spell casting. The snow scene did look a little fake, though, and could have been done better with practical effects.

What I Didn’t Like:
The Omission of Characters: In the novel, Amma is Ethan’s housekeeper. She has helped raise him, she takes pride in her cooking, and she is big on the practice of voodoo. She does not run the Gatlin County Library – that job belongs to Marian, the long-time friend of Ethan’s deceased mother. The film puts too much responsibility on Amma, combining her character with Marian’s, and doesn’t give Amma the ability to shine on her own. Both of these women play significant but different roles in Ethan’s life. I felt that forcibly combining the two watered down Amma’s character, and left nothing for a talented actress like Viola Davis to work with. Also missing are Ethan’s father (no big loss, he doesn’t play a huge role in the first novel), and the Sisters – Ethan’s three great aunts, who are hilarious in the novel and also provide a lot of the back story to the locket visions.
Larkin: While this character doesn’t play a super big role in the books, he is still relevant. In the film he is only in two scenes and we don’t even know what his powers are until the very end. His character isn’t really anything like he is in the novel and could have been left out entirely. This saddens me because a very talented young actor, Kyle Gallner, was cast in this role and was sorely underutilized.
The Flashbacks: These are supposed to play a pivotal role in the story, but Ethan and Lena don’t seem to care about them. We only see two, one of which is just a collection of random images that doesn’t seem to mean anything. The other tells a story that connects Ethan and Lena, yet the film gives it a brief discussion and skirts away from it. The flashback scenes were some of the most interesting in the first novel, and they explain the curse on Lena’s family and why Ethan is so drawn to her.
The Inclusion of Aspects from Beautiful Darkness: The film revealed a large plot point from the second book, involving Macon and Ethan’s mother – which I didn’t like. Also, Lena’s actions at the end of this film are very similar to those in the end of the second novel. I would have preferred to keep the two separate, especially if they want to continue the series.
No School Dance: This scene was my favorite in the book, and I really wanted to see it acted out. Who wouldn’t want to see Ridley give those popular brats a taste of their own medicine?
The Climax: While it was similar, I felt it lacked the action that it had in the book. It was missing a couple significant characters, fire, and violence. It feels the like climaxes of the first two novels in the series were mashed together poorly, screwing up the continuity of the rest of the series, should they continue to be made into films.
The Lack of Incubi: Macon Ravenwood is an incubus from a long line of them. In the film, he is nothing more than a dark castor turned light, but in the novel he is much stronger, both literally and in casting. The incubi play a significant role in the books, and I don’t see how the next two can be made into films without the inclusion of these creatures.

What I’m on the Fence About:
The Change in the Love Story: If this ends up being a stand-alone film, I can adjust to the differences in the love story. I understand Lena’s decision in the movie, and it works for the film version of the story, but it won’t if the series continues to get the film treatment. It doesn’t make sense with the story flow, and the next entries will have to be changed to follow this story arc, thus continuing to scramble the rest of the series.

Overall, it’s not a bad film, but it is severely lacking if you have read the books. I hope it remains a standalone film, because I don’t want the rest of the series to be butchered due to the changes made to the first story. Actors were underused and characters disregarded. What saves this is that aside from the deviations from the novel, the love story is still gripping to me and the acting, cinematography, and special effects were all very well done.

6.5/10 

Valentine (2001)

Directed by: Jamie Blanks

Starring: Marley Shelton, Denise Richards, David Boreanaz, Jessica Capshaw, Jessica Cauffiel and Katherine Heigl

Genre: Horror, Slasher

Rated: R

After Shelley, a pretty young medical student, is brutally murdered, her friends from Junior High begin receiving perverse Valentine’s Day cards. As the girls try to figure out who may be behind the creepy cards and Shelley’s murder, the killer continues to stalk, and any of them could be next.

This film is just one of the many “hip,” self-aware slasher clones that spawned from Scream, yet I have a soft spot for such flicks. These clones were my introduction to horror culture, coming out just around the time I was old enough to start watching my soon-to-be favorite genre. No matter how poorly they were received, or made, I can still find some good qualities in them.

For instance, Valentine isn’t a great movie by any means, but I find it entertaining. The story is a generic slasher plot and the characters aren’t really that likable, but it does have its good points. The cherub mask that the killer wears is creepy and some of the death scenes are pretty inventive – my favorite involving the hot tub. I also liked that the deaths were linked to things the girls said or did in the beginning of the film, for example, “I’d rather be boiled alive.” It is a clever use of foreshadowing that I find fun.

The acting has its ups and downs. I don’t really find Marley Shelton to be a strong enough actress to carry the film. She plays sweet and innocent well, but lacks the strength to be believable as the film’s heroine. Denise Richards didn’t really have to stretch too much to play Paige, either, as Paige is all about being sexy and sultry, and that’s what Denise is. I wish Katherine Heigl could have been utilized more, as I generally enjoy her work. Out of all the girls, Jessica Capshaw was the only one who really seemed to bring her character to life. Dorothy is the least likable and most developed female character, with her self-esteem issues, jealousy, and anger at the world. David Boreanaz is as charming as ever as Adam, making girls swoon with his adoration for Kate. (Although why he loves her so much is a mystery, she’s sweet, but she’s bland.)

I did like that the girls all seemed to be very confident women and didn’t let guys treat them like garbage. Well, all except for Dorothy, anyway. Kate keeps Adam at a distance due to his drinking, Lily bails on her man when he proves unfaithful, and Paige “takes care of” a guy who disrespects her, in a rather unpleasant manner. These girls may be one- dimensional, but they have self-respect, which is nice to see.

What this film tried to do, and failed at, was create a twist ending the viewer cannot see coming. It’s obvious very early on who the killer really is. While the reveal is a crafty construction by the actual killer, the audience isn’t going to fall for it. I do, however, like how subtle the twist is, happening right before the credits. If you blink, you may miss it.

There are also little bothersome things that leave me with questions. How did the killer drop the rose by the hot tub without being noticed? How many people have access to Kate’s apartment? It seems like everyone and their brother is always creeping about in there. What was the relevance of Kate’s water not working? What happened to Brian?

Overall, it’s not a well-made film, or well-written, but it is entertaining, and it does have its moments.

5.5/10