Halloween 2024: October 15th

Fear (1996)

In 1997, former Funky Bunch leader, underwear model, and hate crime enthusiast Mark Wahlberg gave a vulnerable, meaningful performance in "Boogie Nights." It proved that the brawny pretty boy from Baastan was, in fact, a talented actor. In the years since then, Wahlberg has become a huge star, a Hollywood big shot, and earned two Academy Award nominations. Still, he's rarely returned to the level of depth and angst he showed as Dirk Diggler, usually insisting on sticking to his tough guy persona in-between attending Mass, investing in cricket teams, and making insensitive comments about 9/11. A year before his breakout performance, Wahlberg had his first starring role in tawdry, uncreatively entitled thriller "Fear." While the film was dismissed by most critics in 1996, it was a hit with teenagers and has since developed a cult following, receiving a few reappraisals over the years. Time for me to investigate further. 

16 year old Nicole lives in the woods outside Seattle with her security expert dad Steve, her step-mom Laura, and stepbrother Toby. While out with friends, she catches the eye of the mysterious David McCall. His good looks and sensitive words entrance Nicole and the two are soon professing their love for each other. However, after seeing her hugging a platonic male friend, David becomes violent. Nicole breaks up with him but is soon won back over. Steve is cautious of the boy, especially after discovering his daughter is having sex with him. After Nicole spies David coercing her troubled friend Margo into sex at a crack party, she dumps him permanently. David doesn't take rejection well and begins to terrorize Nicole and her family, insisting she belongs to him. Things come to a head when David and his hoodlum friends descend on the house.

If "Fear" was a smarter, more perceptive film, it would be about how young women, so often conditioned to be submissive, ignore obvious red flags and their better judgement when around guys who are obviously bad news. A few days after they start dating, David is already ordering Nicole around. He tells her to get him a drink and starts walking around her father's house like he owns the place. He ignores curfews and personal boundaries, pushing her into more sexual acts. What's especially infuriating about this is how much Nicole's stepmom approves of David's obviously manipulative behavior. Laura wants Nicole to like her, to rely on her when she's feeling down, which means accepting her boyfriend. Who is, by the way, older than her and a high school graduate while Nicole is a sophomore. When David gives Nicole a black eye and beats her friend up, everyone is far too willing to forgive him. His route to forgiveness involves some pathetic begging, gifts, and an insincere apology. All of this, sadly, is all too common an experience in reality. Boys behave badly, girls are told directly or indirectly to accept it, and obvious signs of abuse or manipulation are ignored. If "Fear" told that story in the context of a trashy thriller, it could've been pulpy fun while carrying a deeper, more relevant message. 

That's not the movie "Fear" is though. Producer Bryan Grazer pitched it as "Fatal Attraction for teens." The film falls right into the clichés of the domestic thriller format, in which an unhinged outsider upsets the equilibrium of suburban tranquility. Considering this, perhaps it should be unsurprising that Nicole – despite ostensibly being the protagonist – is not centered in her own story. No, "Fear" is actually about her dad. In his first scene, Steve comments on Nicole wearing a short dress. Later, her stepmom calls her a slut for wearing make-up. Dad wants his daughter to go to a James Taylor concert with him but she chooses to hang out with her ruffian friends instead. While the push-and-pull of being a parent with a growing teenager, eager to establish independence, is fertile ground for a thriller, "Fear" doesn't go in that direction. The night David takes Nicole's virginity, he steals a bracelet that says "Daddy's Girl." Later, he defaces it to say "David's Girl." Steve constantly watches his daughter on a security monitor. After he suspects that her boyfriend is beating her up, the adult man confronts the teenage boy in a verbal battle of macho wills. (Which includes, of course, David questioning the man's sexuality and virility.) Later, he vandalizes Steve's midlife crisis mobile, with a gross note referring to "popping both your cherries." Not Nicole's cherry, her father's. By the time we get to the last act, where David repeatedly asks Nicole to choose between him or her dad, the implication is clear. "Fear" is about how young women belong to men, either their fathers or their lovers. Ultimately, how they control their own sexuality and life choices, the film seems to say, should be up to their dads. Did a purity ball organizer write this? This unseemly subtext is paired with multiple scenes of teenage girls in the shower, their bathing suits, or their underwear. The result is a movie that feels disconcertingly obsessed with the sexuality of young girls and how they are perceived, not by themselves, but by the men in their lives.

But I'm the idiot here, expecting sensitive politics from a cheesy nineties movie. The domestic thriller is, inherently, a conservative genre. It values the integrity of the 1 man/1 woman/2.5 kids household above all else. The minute the threat is defeated, and Steve reestablishes himself as the alpha male of the household, "Fear" ends with images of its family hugging one another. The evil has been vanquished, balance is restored. It's a story type built on the most hysterical of insecurities. This is likely why movies like this so often veer towards high camp. "Fear" was directed by James Foley, who made classy movies like "Glengarry Glen Ross" and "At Close Range" before the success of this film led him to similar schlock like "Perfect Strangers" and the latter two "Fifty Shades" movies. The first act of "Fear" suggests it might've been a prestigious film too, as the cinematography and editing are slick. The infamous sequence where David gives Nicole her first orgasm on a rollercoaster pushes the movie into the realm of erotic thriller. It only grows seedier from there. David's gang of hooligans are cartoonishly evil, blowing crack smoke into Alyssa Milano's face as she gives one a lap dance. The sequence where David makes his first kill features the bad guy flipping someone through the air like a pro-wrestler. The last third moves "Fear" totally into the realm of overheated horror. David tattoos Nicole's name on his chest before leading a "Straw Dogs" style siege on the home. Once it becomes a totally trashy home invasion thriller, I was finally able to enjoy "Fear." There's a good, gross shock involving a doggy door. A little kid runs someone over. An electric drill is weaponized. When a shadow of an intruder moves over a window like "Nosferatu," Foley and his team finally find the right balance between sensationalism and professionalism. If "Fear" has operated in this mode its entire runtime, it might have reached the campy heights of "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle."  

Perhaps "Fear's" melodramatic emotions is exactly why it appealed so much to teenagers. Everything feels more intense at that age, when petty disagreements between young lovers become living soap operas. "Fear" operates like an R-rated afterschool special, with its reductive moral, exaggerated anxieties, and Carter Burwell's thundering score. The youth demographic is also obvious in the fashion and soundtrack, which scream 1996. There are certainly signs that the film is in on its own joke. Mark Wahlberg, with his usual douchebag posturing and overpowering Masshole accent, makes David the sketch comedy version of a teenage stalker. (Most apparent during a hilarious scene where he spits threats through a keyhole.) Milano and William Petersen, as the dad, give similarly sweaty performances. Reese Witherspoon – who viciously subverted gender politics like this in "Freeway" and "Election" – is going for more realism. Which is a choice, I guess. Maybe if I saw this as a teen, at a sleepover where everyone thought Marky Mark was hunky, I'd have nostalgia for it. Watching as an adult, I find the script more gross than fun and its approach more often silly than amusing. I like plenty of similar trash so I understand why it's a fave for some but I couldn't embrace "Fear." [6/10]

Fangs (1981)

Anyab

Most of us can wrap our brains around the idea of a foreign knock-off of a popular domestic product. It follows that people in another country would be interested in a cheaper, locally produced version of an internationally renowned name. In the film world, this makes plenty of sense too. Countries like Italy or India, with their extensive movie industries and broad distribution networks, could cash-in on the popularity of global blockbusters for a fraction of the cost. Moreover, productions such as these allow filmmakers in other countries to reinterpret popular themes through their own cultural identities. However, what do we make of foreign language rip-offs of unpopular films? Though an enduring cult following has made it the longest running movie of all time now, "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" was notoriously commercially unsuccessful upon initial release. "Rocky Horror's" rejection of gender conformity and heteronormativity surely made it a difficult movie to export in conservative countries where homosexuality is outlawed. Such as, say, Egypt. In spite of that truth, for years, I have heard of the existence of an Egyptian version of "Rocky Horror." That "Anyab" – translation: "Fangs" – is real proves that Richard O'Brien's queer musical must have resonated with someone in the Land of the Pharaohs. The lack of behind-the-scenes information on director Mohammed Shebl and "Fangs" leaves many questions unanswered but the film survives and, in many regards, speaks for itself. 

In truth, "Fangs" only follows the first act of "Rocky Horror" before going off in its own direction, sidestepping most of the queer elements altogether. Nevertheless: A narrator in an office introduces us to Ali and Mona, who are young and in love. They set off on a road trip before they catch a flat in a thunderstorm, seeking shelter in a near-by mansion. They are invited inside by a hunchback, who informs them that a party is ongoing. The master of ceremonies is none other than Count Dracula himself, who soon expresses an interest in Mona. The young lovers will learn much about the nature of the world during the long night.

"Rocky Horror" was obviously the main inspiration for "Fangs." Not only does it apes the beginning, it is also a musical. Several of the songs share the same purpose as their counterparts. A pair of red lips introduce us and the story's themes. Ali and Mona express their feelings for each other during a duet not dissimilar to "Damnit Janet." The couple sing about searching out a light as they approach the mansion in the pouring rain, with the hunchback getting a solo. There's no "Time Warp" or "Sweet Transvestite" equivalents, though Dracula's party guests do perform a dance number and the count gets an introductory song. Once Dracula appears, "Fangs" begins to owe more to Bram Stoker. What with the subplot of the vampire attempting to seduce the virtuous maiden, a shot of the count climbing up the castle, and a shout-out to Christopher Lee. Much the same way O'Brien's musical freely mixed his angst about his own sexual identity with his love of vintage rock 'n' roll and campy sci-fi/horror, "Fangs" is a similarly intriguing jumble of pre-existing pop culture. It's more blatant about what it steals from. "The Munsters" theme appears alongside the soundtracks to "A Clockwork Orange," "Jaws," "For a Few Dollars More," and "The Man with the Golden Gun." The film keeps many of the same horror tropes that "Rocky Horror" used and combines them with the romantic love triangles and status quo reinforcing melodrama. (There's also a training montage that might've been inspired by "Rocky.") Meanwhile, the fashion is strictly of the late seventies and early eighties, with quite a few disco beats, velour jumpsuits, brightly colored leotards, and KISS-style face paint. In other words, "Fangs" is a fascinating remix of all sorts of pop iconography that was still ricocheting around the globe at the time. 

At the same time, one feels as if the movie reflects a specifically Egyptian identity. First off, a chicken is slaughtered during the opening credits, the kind of thing you'd not expected to see in a Western production. Secondly, the film leans much more on the idea of naïve innocents facing a world that threatens to corrupt them. Ali and Mona are said to have an outlook that is "pink," while the narrator and the villain warn that the world is more "black" than that. A lengthy sequence in the middle begins with the narrator saying vampires are only fictional before Dracula breaks the fourth wall. We are then treated to a half-hour long series of fantasy scenarios, wherein Ali and Mona's future wedded bliss is repeatedly assaulted by another type of bloodsucker: Businessmen. Dracula appears as a plumber that charges outrageous amounts for a quick fix. He also takes the guide of a skimping butcher, a shifty used cars saleman, a greedy landlord, a flint-nosed cabdriver, a cheating doctor, on and on. The repetitive scenarios each conclude with the vampire flashing his fangs, paired with a dramatic sting on the soundtrack, and the narrator laughing him off. It goes on way too long but the message is clear. The real threat to Ali and Mona's "pink" worldview is not so much literal vampires as the crushing financial realities of the world. This theme is obviously universal while the specificity of "Fangs'" allegory reflect an Egyptian viewpoint. (Dracula also compares himself to Hitler, dispelling any unfortunate anti-Semitic stereotypes about vampires. The corrosive elements here are greed and authority, not the Jews.) 

"Fangs" is probably too long. None of its songs are the immediate ear worms we heard in "Rocky Horror," though they're aren't bad in their own right either. The synth and disco infused music has charms of its own. Mostly, "Fangs" fascinated me for the lo-fi Halloween party ambiance it contains. A blanket of fog always floats along the floor of Dracula's abode. The big dance number has the guests donning rubber Halloween masks while shaking it in front of large cardboard cut-outs of the classic monsters. The production design in general is neat, with some high-contrast reds and blacks on display. The classic horror theming continues throughout, in the subplot about the enslaved hunchback desiring freedom and a black-and-white musical number Dracula has. In general, there's a sort of homemade, pop art energy to much of "Fangs." The characters' thoughts sometimes appear as comic book word balloons. Colorful graphics and text appear on-screen at various intervals. A bizarre dinner sequence has Dracula pausing and restarting time itself. It's much more refined than "Witchdoctor of the Livingdead's" kids-playing-in-the-backyard chaos while maintaining the same sort of do-it-yourself value. 

"Fangs" lacks the outright transgressive queerness of its primary inspiration for obvious reasons. However, the movie is subversive in a sense. The bloodsuckers are vanquished in surprisingly gruesome fashion while the young lovers look forward to a bright future, on the steps of the Great Pyramids, well aware of the darkness of the world but staying optimistic. Honestly, I kind of like that ending better than Brad and Janet sinking into hedonism and emptiness. Drac's other sidekick also shadow-boxes while in the shower, so maybe the movie is gayer than I gave it credit for. The film is an off-beat camp artifact that boldly steals from way more famous movies. At the same time, this is more than refitting a Hollywood movie for local sensibilities, the way "Mahakaal" was. "Fangs" is weird and quirky and personal and funky in a way that I can enjoy, an ideal type of overseas rip-off that uses the far more well-known source material as a jumping-off point for the director's own ideas. This is my first exposure to Egyptian genre cinema and it has me excited to check out more movies like this. [7/10]

The Twilight Zone (2002): Upgrade

The 2002 version of "The Twilight Zone" rarely impresses but I include every other version in this marathon, so it seems rude to leave it out. "Upgrade" at least has a suitably "Zone"-ish premise. Annie is moving into a new home with her family. Her teenage son and daughter are always arguing. Her husband isn't the most helpful. Csonka, the family dog, christens the place by whizzing on the fireplace. In a moment of desperation, Annie wishes for a better family. That's when Csonka is replaced with a well-behaved poodle. When Annie notices this, her husband insists Csonka has always looked like this. Soon, much to Annie's horror, everyone in her family is replaced with "perfect" alternatives. Is she experiencing a breakdown or is something stranger going on here?

"Upgrade" functions on a notice that every version of "Zone" has considered at least once: Be careful what you wish for. The idea of Annie getting what she wants, only to be horrified with the results, is a potentially intriguing idea. Unfortunately, "Upgrade" rushes into it so quickly that we never get a chance to feel much of an impact. There's one or two scenes with her obnoxious teenage kids before they are replaced with idyllic new versions. We get a few more scenes with her husband – played by the rapist from "Thelma & Louise" – before he's replaced. Tthe episode never truly digs into Annie's deeper wants and needs. Her old family doesn't seem that bad, which could've been part of a point. Simply because we love someone doesn't mean they don't do things that annoy us. Any minor resentment she has towards them is barely established before the change happens. A change, by the way, which doesn't have any evident downside of its own. The new family is perfect and the horror of the situation comes from Annie not knowing why this shift is happening. Which is a valid enough idea. The people we see everyday inexplicably changing appearances and personalities would be very distressing. However, a little more time spent with everyone before the weird shit begins, to give us a better idea of what is being lost, would've improved this tremendously. 

This being the 2002 version of "The Twilight Zone," there's not a degree of subtly at work here. Every shift is accompanied by a dramatic whooshing noise, happening exactly when you expect them too. I think the tension is supposed to arise from us wondering why this is happening. Is Annie having a psychotic break, from the stress of moving into a new home? Was a supernatural bargain struck at some point or is this a reality shifting, Mandela Effect type thing? The answer is revealed in the final minutes and it's very stupid, disregarding everything that was interesting about the idea up to that point. In spite of its flaws, "Upgrade" still almost works based on a decent performance from Susanna Thompson as Annie. She conveys a convincing amount of panic and confusion as a woman whose life is transforming around her for no reason she can detect. "Upgrade" is too shallow, in its execution and ideas, to truly impress. However, Thompson doing a good job of freaking out at least gives this rushed half-hour a bead of pathos. [6/10]

Hair-Raising Hare (1946)

The golden age of American animation and the classic era of horror just so happen to occur at the same time. Accordingly, there were quite a few cartoons from the thirties and forties goofing on the then-contemporary monster movies. Perhaps the best of them all is Chuck Jones' "Hair-Raising Hare." It begins with Bugs Bunny rising from his burrow, when he sees a shapely female rabbit. He follows the curvy bunny into a spooky mansion, only realizing too late that she's a wind-up doll. That's when the mad doctor in the castle, who looks a lot like Peter Lorre, reveals the true reason he lured the rabbit to his lair: To feed him to the big, red, hairy monster that lives in his basement. A wacky chase ensues. 

The horror-adjacent Disney shorts made around this same time were more about putting a whimsical spin on the classic iconography of the genre. Chuck Jones and the Merrie Melodies, meanwhile, used the monster movie premise as set-dressing for a series of progressively sillier gags. It starts with the ominous castle having a neon sign out front and builds to Gossimer's own reflection being scared off by the sight of him. The elastic stretch-and-squish of cartooning is eventually applied to reality itself. In "Hair-Raising Hare," the Fourth Wall is repeatedly transgressed, the audience eventually invited to participate in the story itself and, indirectly, saving the day at the end. The horror trappings of the short – the spooky castle, the Lorre-esque villain, a trap door, a suit of armor with a glistening axe – are more ingredients to blend into the freewheeling absurdity of the piece. 

Gossimer, himself, is the greatest gag of the film. Bugs compares him to both Frankenstein and Dracula, yet Gossimer draws from no specific legacy of monsters. Instead, a big menacing mound of brightly colored hair, topped off with the absurd visual of colorful nails and bright white sneakers, makes him a generic idea of a "monster" that later works like "Sesame Street" would run with. Despite being nearly eighty years old, "Hair-Raising Hare" remains sharp and funny. That's largely because Bugs Bunny, the ever anarchistic smart-ass, remains a highly amusing hero. After all, he gets into this situation for reasons most any male can relate too: He sees an attractive partner and has a momentary lapse in judgement. From there, Bugs pulls schemes that range from packing up a golf bag and running for the door, turning a suit of armor into a locomotive, and stops to do his enemy's nails. By the end of these seven minutes, most any concern for narrative has gone out the window, the mad scientist that instigated this plot not being seen again. Instead, "Hair-Raising Hare" is dedicated to making the viewer laugh with zanier gags, as noble a cause as any other I can think of. The result is a classic bit of cartooning that stands the test of time. [8/10]