Halloween 2022: September 21st

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022)

Yesterday, I said Ghostface was the first slasher icon to return after Blumhouse's “Halloween” made a killing. The next famous masked murderer to revive was Leatherface. In a blatant emulation of Michael Myers' return, the new “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” would continue the original's story while ignoring everything else. Producer Fede Álvarez treated this like a bold approach but it's actually the third or fourth time the franchise has done this. Shortly after filming began, news broke that the directors were fired and replaced. Months later, reports of disastrous test screenings filtered out. Legendary Pictures must've lost faith in the film after that and took a project originally intended for theaters to Netflix. The new “Massacre” debuted this past February, after which horror nerds hotly debated whether it was total garbage or semi-decent. Now that the sawdust has long since settled, it's my turn to weigh-in.

Rich city folks Melody and Dante arrive in the nearly deserted Texan town of Harlow, with eyes towards auctioning off its abandoned properties. Along for the ride is Lila, Melody's little sister. The first building the group looks at is an old orphanage, still occupied by its elderly proprietor and a mute man-child. After Melody has the old woman kicked out under morally dubious grounds, she dies of a heart attack. This prompts her last remaining ward – actually Leatherface, missing since 1973 – to start wearing other people's faces and swinging a chainsaw around again. Soon, Lila and Melody are fighting for their lives as Leatherface rampages through the nearly-empty town. Help appears in the form of Sally Hardesty, the sole survivor of the original Texas Chain Saw Massacre, who is eager for revenge.

Director David Blue Garcia might've been a last-minute replacement, who scrapped all the previous directors' footage, but he manages to make a decent-looking movie. I was unsurprised to read that Garcia – who previously made a little-seen thriller called “Tejano” – has mostly worked as a cinematographer. The oppressive sunlight of southern Texas, so strong in the original, shines through a sunflower field here. The shadows are foreboding, the interiors of the homes feeling fittingly desolate. The entire last act is set during a downpour, bringing some nice dark-and-stormy night ambiance to the proceedings. Some of Garcia's visual choices are a little overdone. There's a few distracting jump-scares and a triumphant use of slow-motion that was definitely misguided. Yet it's still a visually confident film, that's more distinctive than the last few chainsaw massacres.

A lot of horror fans seriously lacking in self-awareness claim the genre has gotten too “woke” now. This crowd had their fangs barred for 2022’s “Chainsaw Massacre.” Leatherface’s foster-mom has a Confederate flag hanging outside her home, disturbing the African-American Dante. Earlier, Melody sneers at an open-carrying good ol’ boy. The guy then makes a comment about “feral hogs,” proving the screenwriter spends too much time on Twitter. Most notoriously, one of Leatherface’s victims records him with a cellphone and threatens the maniac with being “canceled.” What the anti-woke crowd seemed to miss is that Garcia's "Texas Chainsaw" is soundly anti-hipster. Dante and Melody are painted as clueless gentrifiers, determined to wipe out any trace of the native culture in favor of what they deem modern and sophisticated. Melody is humbled upon realizing she really did needlessly evict an old lady, bringing this on herself. Even the gun-toting redneck is revealed to be a good guy. Class tensions has always been a present theme in the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" movies. The new one handles this in a fairly ham-fisted manner, coming close to a wishy-washy "can't we all just get along?" mentality. But Leatherface as the enraged avatar of an alienated working class, striking back at an arrogant group of clueless rich kids, is pretty in-keeping with this franchise. It's hardly a woke new direction. 

More distracting than the sequel's decision to play up the social divides is Lila's backstory. She's a survivor of a school shooting, still sporting bullet wound scars on her neck. This has left her thoroughly traumatized, with a phobia of firearms. Yes, this is another modern horror picture about "trauma," as Lila's fight against Leatherface will see her facing her fears. The script's wimpy both-sides-ism is evident in Lila also conquering her fears of guns. (Though, in keeping with slasher tradition, it doesn't help her much.) It says a lot about how prolific mass shootings have gotten in America that one can casually be an incidental event in a common-place slasher sequel. Honestly, I just wish a trashy, disposable franchise flick hadn't gone there. The specific issues around the gun problem in America doesn't inform Lila's trauma in any way. She could have been scarred by a car accident or whatever and the story wouldn't have changed. If you're going to introduce some real-life horror like that into your movie, your movie should probably become all about that topic. A chainsaw massacre in Texas, fifty years ago, pales in comparison to the firearm massacres that occur all over the country all the goddamn time. 

While I guess I appreciate the sequel's attempts to add some depth to the material, that's not what this "Chainsaw Massacre" is about. For the most part, this is an exceptionally goofy slasher flick. Leatherface shatters a guy's arm and then stabs him to death with the protruding bone. A hotly debated sequence does indeed have our killer doing his thing in a neon-drenched, crowded party-bus. That scene concludes with someone halfway out a window being sawed in half at the waist. And we simply have to accept that our heavyset killer, surely in his late sixties or seventies by now, has no problem chasing after teenagers, taking hits from moving vehicles, or tossing people through the air. The butchery is well-executed though. Garcia adds some suspense to the splatter, as Melody watches helplessly as her rescuer's head gets caved-in with a sledgehammer. Or when she hides under the floorboards from the saw blade. The violence is often needlessly cruel. A broken glass evisceration borders torture-porn territory while a sudden decapitation plays too much like a sick joke. Yet the film mostly has the fun/mean balance we expect from slasher flicks correct. 

By the way, the Sally Hardesty subplot – definitely inserted to make this film similar to David Gordon Green's "Halloween" – ends up having little effect on the story. Elderly Sally doesn't resemble her counterpart from the original much, while child-like Leatherface is mostly reduced to a murderous brute. I also wish the sequel had done more with the suggestion that Leatherface's killings have passed into local legend. The opening scene is set in a gas-station selling novelty chainsaw corkscrews and that's the end of that. Mostly, I enjoyed this one. It's only 82 minutes long, looks good, has a smattering of suspense, gallons of gruel, and features a way overqualified cast. Elsie Fisher and Sarah Yarkin should probably get new agents. 2022's "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is pretty dumb but somehow still not the dumbest entry in this much-abused series. It managed to exceed my admittedly abyssal expectations. Hell, I'd be up for the sequel the post-credits stinger hints at, even if history suggests another continuity wiping reboot is way likelier. [6/10]

Invisible Ghost (1941)

In the thirties and forties, you had the iconic movie studios: Universal, RKO, M-G-M, so on and so forth. On the opposite side of this spectrum, you had the Poverty Row studios. These were generally short-lived companies with limited resources, who quickly cranked out B-movies to play on the bottom half of double-bills. Among classic horror nerds, I think Monogram Pictures might be the most well-known. This is likely because Monogram scooped up classic genre stars when they could get them. After Karloff did a few pics for them, they attracted Bela Lugosi. The former Dracula would make nine movies for Monogram. The first film Lugosi would star in for Monogram was 1941's “Invisible Ghost.”

Charles Kessler was left heart-broken when his wife left him for another man and subsequently died in a car wreck. Every year on her birthday, he has dinner with an empty chair representing her. However, the truth is stranger than that: Mrs. Kessler did not die but was merely left brain-damaged. Kessler's servants have been taking care of her, in secret, on his property. When she wanders out of her hiding place and is spotted by Kessler, he goes into a fugue-like state and strangles a maid to death. His daughter's boyfriend is accused and executed for the crime, causing the man's twin brother to investigate. Every time Kessler sees his presumed dead wife, he falls into the same murderous trance, unaware of his actions. Detectives investigate.

I can not, in any good conscious, say “Invisible Ghost” is Bela Lugosi's silliest performance. Not when “Glen or Glenda?” or “Plan 9 from Outer Space” exists. Yet it would certainly be a contender if not for those later Ed Wood collaborations. For most of the film, Bela plays a kindly man who is friendly to everyone around him. When he spots the visage of his wife – presumably the invisible ghost the title refers to, though she's very visible – his body goes stiff. His eyes become wide, his jaws slack. He sticks his hands out in a downward, claw-like fashion. His murder weapon of choice is his overcoat, which he tosses over his targets. This has the effect of making it look like Bela is hugging his victims to death with a blanket. When combined with the Mr. Burns-like posture, the effect is quite comical.

I've seen a few reviews refer to “Invisible Ghost” as being creatively directed, with some effective black-and-white photography. I guess, compared to the lowest dregs of Monogram's output, this is true. There's some occasionally lively cinematography, such as when the camera darts around a dinner table. The film's best moment has Lugosi sneaking into a shadowy bedroom, creeping up to a sleeping maiden's bed. It's a scene obviously reminiscent of Lugosi's most famous role and represents “Invisible Ghost” at its most atmospheric. The domestic scenes of Bela, his daughter, and the servants hanging out are even kind of cozy. As I've said many times before, I have a soft spot for creaky thirties and forties movies like this sometimes.

Yet, for the most part, “Invisible Ghost” is largely boring. Many of its scenes are flatly directed. The pace drags on horribly, despite the film only being an hour long. Even an utterly ludicrous storyline, which pushes believably even by the standards of forties B-movies, does little to liven things up. After three or more murders on his property, the police never consider Charles as a suspect. (They instead focus on his black butler, which is sadly true-to-life, I guess.) Why Kessler's gardener thought it was reasonable to hide his boss' wife from him, instead of just taking her to the hospital or something, is barely elaborated upon. How this deception has gone on for years, undetected, is also left unanswered. Similarly, why the sight of his wife turns Lugosi into a mesmerized killer is unexplained. The appearance of an identical twin brother is just another of the film's oddball plot elements.

I'll give “Invisible Ghost” this much. The aforementioned African-American butler, played by respected actor Clarence Muse, stops just shy of being a regressive stereotype. That Lugosi would stick with Monogram through so many pictures, including two appearances in their ridiculously long-running East Side Kids/Bowery Boys series, is a testament to the sad state of his career in the forties. “Invisible Ghost” is mostly a snooze, even if the unlikely directions its story bend in prove a little memorable. The film is also in the public domain, leading to it being available on every video site you can think of. At least it'll cost you nothing to watch it, if you're a classic horror nut like me hopeful to dig up a gem among B-movie dross. [5/10]

Creepshow: Skeletons in the Closest / Familiar

The downward slide of “Creepshow: Season Three” improves slightly in its second episode. “Skeletons in the Closest” concerns Lampini, a horror nerd who is opening a museum full of famous movie props that he co-runs with his devoted girlfriend. The rival to his late father, who shared Lampini's hobby, plots to get the guy locked up in prison for literal grave-robbing. They kill the man but his skeleton comes to life and seeks vengeance. “Familiar” concerns Jackson, a lawyer who spontaneously visits a fortune teller during a night out with his girlfriend. The man warns him that an evil spirit is following him. Jackson soon begins to see a demonic entity, forcing him to seek help from the fortune teller again.

Greg Nicotero's previous “Creepshow” episodes featured in-jokes for genre fans. “Skeletons in the Closest” builds its entire story around those in-jokes, quickly becoming insufferable. The museum is full of famous props from film and TV, all of which are named. The second half directly copies “Phantasm,” “Psycho,” “The Shining,” and “Jason and the Argonauts” without any elegance. A sequence told through comic book panel, featuring wall-to-wall movie quotes, is when this officially gets obnoxious. To make this more mastubatory, “Creepshow” itself is referenced. Lampini, played by a mugging Victor Riveria, embodies the sweaty smugness people despise about nerds. His girlfriend, a sexy goth chick, is nothing more than a wish-fulfillment fantasy. Despite doing terrible things, these two do not receive their E.C. Comics-style comeuppance. Instead, Lampini is rewarded for his evil deeds. James Remar is mildly amusing as the rival and there's some fun stop-motion effects. But “Skeletons in the Closest” is mostly an exhausting act of intolerable self-indulgence. 

“Familiar” is directed by Joe Lynch, who made the best episode of “Creepshow's” second season. This might be why it's the first half-decent segment of the third season. The story is no more complicated than “evil spirit torments guy for no reason.” King Bach's protagonist is as thinly defined as you can get. Yet Lynch knows how to build suspense. The sequences of the demon uses shadows, sound design, and creature effects to create some creepiness. The script seems to imply that the fortune teller, who is amusingly money-grubbing, and the girlfriend, played by “V/H/S'” striking Hannah Fierman, have something to do with the haunting. This never actually goes anywhere. The ending is mildly ironic but feels half-formed. Nevertheless, Lynch's direction still makes this a mildly spooky and entertaining episode. [Skeletons in the Closest: 4/10 / Familiar: 6/10]

Chucky: Give Me Something Good to Eat

The second episode of “Chucky” tries to win me over right away by setting itself on Halloween. Jake is now living with his rich aunt and uncle, his popular kid cousin Junior regarding him with suspicion. This increases after the family housekeeper brutally dies, Chucky seemingly being responsible for the death. The doll insists he didn't do it, while continuing to try and convince Jake to murder Lexy, Junior's bitchy girlfriend. At a fancy Halloween party that night, Chucky bounds with Lexy's little sister, who is seemingly on the spectrum. Jake, meanwhile, suffers another humiliation and is pushed even further to the edge.

“Give Me Something Good to Eat” is an episode that devotes several scenes to Chucky's amusing dialogue. He has a back-and-forth with the innocent, not-entirely-understanding Caroline while playing a violent video game. He tries to convince the gifted but naïve child that murder is okay, grumbling to himself in an amusing way. The episode then concludes with a juicy monologue, as the evil doll explains his philosophy to Jake. (A world-view that, naturally, justifies mass murder.) Both of these scenes are so entertaining that they make up for the fact that Chucky, otherwise, doesn't do much in this episode. He hides under the bed Lexy and Junior are making-out on, stabbing up through the mattress, but never delivers a killing blow. Much to his annoyance. Just listening to Dourif's delivery of such acerbic dialogue is pretty entertaining. 

Don Manchini and his team definitely have some deeper themes in-mind with this series. There are obvious social divides between Jake, a child of poverty, and the richer half of his family. This is another factor in why Lexy bullies the kid so viciously. Yet Junior and Lexy are victims too, of parents that push them too hard. Junior's dad wants him to be a track star, like he was. Lexy's mom belittles her own daughter, openly preferring her younger child more. These themes are juicy enough, and the Halloween atmosphere thick enough, to fill up an episode that only moves the overall plot forward a little bit. Hopefully that won't be a problem going forward. Still, I can't bitch too much about an hour that includes Chucky trick-or-treating as Hello Kitty or a shout-out to the razorblade-in-the-apple myth. [6/10]