I joke and say that the eighties is when one-off horror hits become on-going horror franchises. However, we have to examine if this is exactly true. It's not like “The Burning” or “Madman” spawned long-running series. In the late eighties and early nineties, however, a concentrated effort was made to transform fluke indie successes into video store empires. This is the time when suddenly the Angelas, Pumpkinhead, Pinhead, He Who Walks Behind the Rows, Xtro, some werewolves that howl, and whatever the “Witchcraft” movies are about had multiple titles to their names. Perhaps everyone was eager to fill the hole left in the public's heart after Jason and Freddy burned themselves out. Up next was the Warlock, whose first movie must've been a hit for TriMark. After directing “Waxwork II” and “Hellraiser III,” Anthony Hickox would be recruited to turn Julian Sands' stylish, sexually ambiguous, time-traveling he-witch into the next Michael Myers.
Sands' presence as a pretty boy demon-spawn with magical powers is, in fact, the only connecting fiber between “Warlock” and “Warlock: The Armageddon.” The second film instead focuses on an ancient druidic tribe who have sworn to stop the off-spring of Satan from bringing about the end of the world. In the modern day, only a handful of followers survive. Teenage lovers, Kenny and Samantha, are unaware of their destiny as the last in this bloodline. The six rune stones capable of summoning the Devil to Earth have been spread across the country. During a lunar eclipse, the foretold return of the Warlock arrives, reborn as a slimy monster before becoming a man again. He sets out on a road trip to gather the other stones. Kenny's father murders him before bringing him back to life, a necessary step to awaken his magical powers. His elders give him all of six days to train and master the ways of Druid magic before the Warlock arrives in town and attempts to summon his add.
Hickox's ADHD-like style, always bouncing from one idea to the next, is certainly not without its charms. “The Armageddon” exists to be a showcase for two things. First off, Julian Sands gets to ham it up in a variety of places and against multiple partners. He enters the movie nude and screeching, already vamping. At one point, he starts spewing green blood before Frenching a mechanic and stealing his replica of the General Lee. Later, he picks up a street-walker strictly to have another person to banter with and then gorily off. Which he does, spectacularly. Those murder scenes are highly entertaining and each is brought to life with inventively gooey creature effects. A sequence where the Warlock uses his seemingly limited ability to stretch a human being's body into a piece of modern art is easily the high-light of the entire film. Though the bubbling map he makes of torn-off human flesh is cool too. Through it all, there's Sands delighting in being a floating, campy figure of chaos.
And it is a lot of fun, don't get me a wrong. A little more substance perhaps wouldn't have hurt though. While the original had the heroes trying to beat the bad guy to the last Dragon Ball, “The Armageddon” lives the good guys weirdly stationary and puts the villain on the move. Chris Young's teenage hero never actually meets Sands until the showdown at the end. Attempts are made to make the subplot about the Druidic order more complex. The small tow's pastor – played by Bruce Glover, R.I.P. Crispin's dad – used to be a Druid but left when he couldn't bring himself to kill his daughter. Despite knowing she'll come back to life. Considering we all know Sands' Warlock is the star of the show, it all strikes the viewer as an unnecessary attempt to add some conflict and depth to the script's other half. Young isn't a bad lead. The conflict with his dad, played by Steve Kahan is mildly interesting, but all the business with the Druids is an obvious load of nonsense. It's simply there to prepare us for the inevitable showdown and to fill time between the Warlock tearing shit up.
To fans of the early days of cinema, when sound was new and film was in black-and-white, a familiar set of faces are carved upon the face of the Mount Rushmore of Horror. Mostly, it's the same three names that Universal Studios largely build their iconic legacy of monster movies upon: Lugosi, Karloff, and the Chaneys. This is probably true for classic film fans all over the world. However, countries around the world occasionally would attempt, within their own Hollywoods, to build their own Karloffs or Lugosis. A good example is Tod Slaughter. Slaughter got his start on-stage, becoming popular for productions in the Elephant and Castle region of London. He headlined many plays, in roles like Sherlock Holmes and D'Artagnan, but Slaughter would truly excel at playing villains. His most popular roles were William Burke and Sweeney Todd, causing Slaughter to boast that he had committed “15 murders on-stage a day.” Eventually, an attempt would be made to translate Slaughter's stage success to the silver screen, playing a lot of the same roles on-screen. While there was a token attempt to sell Slaughter's films abroad, they never caught on much in America. Nevertheless, recent restorations and Blu-Ray releases have made his work ripe for rediscovery. Why not pick a film from England's home-grown classic horror star to represent that country on my cinematic trip around the world?
Like most of Slaughter's starring roles, “It's Never Too Late to Mend” is a hoary melodrama, set in Victorian London and based on a penny novel from that period. Slaughter plays Squire John Meadows, an openly corrupt justice-of-the-peace. He covets Susan, the daughter of a poor farmer named Merton. Susan, however, is in love with the virtuous George Fielding. Determined to deal with his romantic rival, Meadows cooks up a phony charge of poaching to get George sent off to prison. George's buddy, Tom, swaps places with him so he'll go to jail in his place and George will go off on a trip to Australia. He writes to Susan all the time but the Squire intercepts his letters, making sure she never receives them. Slowly, he conspires to take the girl for his own. What pushes “It's Never Too Late to Mend” into the horror genre is that Squire Meadows is also on the board of governors at the local prison. There, he gleefully enacts a number of cruel punishments on the in-mates, delighting in torturing them far beyond the boundaries of what could be called a “justice” system.
It is, to say the least, all rather hackneyed. Compared to the enormously atmospheric monster movies and thrillers that Universal cranked out in the twenties, thirties, and forties, the visual palette here is rather restrained. There's a cool tracking shot through an open door. A sequence in which a priest comforts a dying young boy in a jail cell, probably the movie's best, looks quite stylish. However, much of “It's Never Too Late to Mend” is rather beholden to its stage roots. There are many scenes of people standing around in rooms and talking. Music is not used that often, only being noticeable in a scene of Slaughter creeping around an empty bar. The sequences devoted to all that old English discipline will probably be of most interest to classic horror heads. A fifteen year old kid is locked in a steel bodice attached to a wall. Prisoners are dropped into a deep, dark hole for days on end. They are forced to turn heavy cranks endlessly. Seems to qualify as cruel and unusual punishment in my eyes, though it falls a bit short of “The Pit and the Pendulum” or the kind of shit Hjalmar Poelzig got up to in “The Black Cat.”
I had previously seen Slaughter's version of “Sweeney Todd.” However, that was a long enough time ago that I have little to no memory of it. Consulting my old review shows that Slaughter's acting was quite over-the-top in that too. It would seem to me that Slaughter's films simply weren't as artistically shot or memorably poetic as the American monster stars he followed in the path of. However, the guy could tear up the scenery. No doubt about that. “It's Never Too Late to Mend” will probably prove equally forgettable, distinguished once again by its star's theatrical vamping. I don't think I'll be picking up that box set of his movies but I did get enough out of this one to probably watch another Tod Slaughter pic somewhere further down the line. [6/10]
Six hours in, “Alien: Earth” has abandoned all pretenses about its individual episodes having any sense of pacing at all. This show has simply become a game of watching the progress bar on its various plot threads load a little more. Wendy is slowly getting the hang of communicating with the xenomorph Prodigy has in captivity. Joe begins to plot out a scheme to help his sister escape the island. After Nibs' disturbing declaration that she was pregnant, the corporate brass talk the scientists into rebooting her memory to before the traumatic incident. The negotiations between Prodigy and Yutani fail, as no amount of billions sees Boy Kavalier willing to give up the aliens. Morrow continues to manipulate Slightly into allowing a warm body to meet a face-hugger. Isaac gets over-confident while dealing with the other alien specimens in the lab, leading to tragedy. A few of these wandering subplots meet up before the episode is over, tricking you into thinking all of this is going somewhere.
One of the elements people complained very, very loudly about with “Prometheus” was that the characters acted in a “stupid” manner. That a scientist poking a weird alien snake thing or a panicked character not thinking to run in a different direction was an unrealistic way for some one to act in a strange situation. There are pros and cons to these arguments. However, considering how lab-tested so much of Disney's franchise extensions are these days to appease internet complainers, you'd think they would avoid people doing stupid shit in their “Alien” series. Instead, “The Fly” has a character wandering into a laboratory full of bizarre, deadly creatures and, through a series of unlikely mistakes, getting trapped in a containment unit with one of the monsters. Certainly, human beings assuming they are at the top of the food chain and underestimating the capabilities of other creatures is a reoccurring idea across the “Alien” films. The implication of this scene in “The Fly” is that Isaac is woefully overestimating his own skills and abilities. However, the number of leaps one must make to accept the reality of this scene playing out are... Excessive.
The most pressing issue of all in “The Fly,” if not most of the episodes of “Alien: Earth,” has been if I actually cared about something happening to any of these characters. Wendy's outrage at Nibs having her memory edited to suit corporate needs is obviously a comment on how far trans-humanist concerns will inevitably conflict with technocratic goals. However, the script writers forgot to make the audience actually have any interest or investment in Nibs before beginning this development. Similarly, has Slightly ever had a purpose within this story line outside of being manipulated by Morrow? The advantage of television over film is that you have more time to flesh-out characters and explore their personalities. Instead, “Earth” having a large cast and multiple plot threads means everyone on this show is an idea that is simply stretched out as long as possible.
If we are not interested in what happens to these people, why am I watching “Alien: Earth?” I'm watching because I talked myself into an non-existent contract to review each episode. However, ostensibly, I'm watching because I'm a fan of the freaky monsters and sci-fi setting of the “Alien” movies. In that case, “The Fly” is also a failure. The little baby xenomorph Wendy chatters with is in a few scene. There's a tiny bit of Facehugger action at the very end. Otherwise, the monster quota in this episode is provided by the mutant sheep glaring from behind glass and an oversized space-insect puking acidic enzymes into someone's face. That bothers me because it seems to show a lack of imagination central to this entire program. When the iconic monster of a horror film is already famous for the acidic components of its bodily fluids, why would you add another creature with skin-melting spew? I don't know, you guys. My capability to not feel increasingly annoyed with this show is running thin. That point-of-view shot of the space-fly buzzing around a room was kind of cool, I guess. [5/10]
One of the elements people complained very, very loudly about with “Prometheus” was that the characters acted in a “stupid” manner. That a scientist poking a weird alien snake thing or a panicked character not thinking to run in a different direction was an unrealistic way for some one to act in a strange situation. There are pros and cons to these arguments. However, considering how lab-tested so much of Disney's franchise extensions are these days to appease internet complainers, you'd think they would avoid people doing stupid shit in their “Alien” series. Instead, “The Fly” has a character wandering into a laboratory full of bizarre, deadly creatures and, through a series of unlikely mistakes, getting trapped in a containment unit with one of the monsters. Certainly, human beings assuming they are at the top of the food chain and underestimating the capabilities of other creatures is a reoccurring idea across the “Alien” films. The implication of this scene in “The Fly” is that Isaac is woefully overestimating his own skills and abilities. However, the number of leaps one must make to accept the reality of this scene playing out are... Excessive.
If we are not interested in what happens to these people, why am I watching “Alien: Earth?” I'm watching because I talked myself into an non-existent contract to review each episode. However, ostensibly, I'm watching because I'm a fan of the freaky monsters and sci-fi setting of the “Alien” movies. In that case, “The Fly” is also a failure. The little baby xenomorph Wendy chatters with is in a few scene. There's a tiny bit of Facehugger action at the very end. Otherwise, the monster quota in this episode is provided by the mutant sheep glaring from behind glass and an oversized space-insect puking acidic enzymes into someone's face. That bothers me because it seems to show a lack of imagination central to this entire program. When the iconic monster of a horror film is already famous for the acidic components of its bodily fluids, why would you add another creature with skin-melting spew? I don't know, you guys. My capability to not feel increasingly annoyed with this show is running thin. That point-of-view shot of the space-fly buzzing around a room was kind of cool, I guess. [5/10]
After directing Canadian horror films like “Funeral Home,” “Killer Party,” and “Blue Monkey” in the eighties, William Fruet would find steady work directing low-budget television shows filmed in the Great White North to save cash. That would include 27 episodes of “Goosebumps,” including the previously reviewed “Welcome to Dead House” and “Don't Look in the Basement.” Those were not complete dog-shit so I return to Fruet's work for my latest attempt to give “Goosebumps” a fair chance. “One Day at Horrorland” concerns the Morris family. A road trip to an amusement park called Zoo Gardens goes wrong when dad gets lost. Trapped in a car with no air conditioning, eldest child Lizzy and youngest child Luke are starting to get antsy. After being assaulted by fireballs on the road, the family begins seeing signs for an attraction called “Horrorland.” The kids beg to go, simply to get out of the car, and the parents reluctantly agree. The mostly abandoned park seems staffed entirely by horned monsters. The rides get the participants too close to real fear. When the family threatens to leave, they see a sign informing them that “No One Leaves Horrorland Alive.” The Morris brood is then ushered onto a soundscape, forced to participate in a game show run by more of these devilish ogres.
I've written before about the potency of the idea of a carnival, amusement park, or circus being used as a setting for a horror story. The contrast between engineered but safe thrills with decidedly not-so-safe thrills is fertile ground. There's exactly two moments in “One Day at Horrorland” that touches on some of these ideas. Shortly after arriving at Horrorland, the kids spot what appears to be a costumed performer holding a decapitated human head. The head then speaks, informing them not to go on the guillotine ride. Hey, that's a mildly gruesome, almost morbidly funny moment! Meanwhile, at the end of the first half-hour – this was originally a two-part episode – the family are faced with a locked gate and a sign reading “No Exit.” Aside from being a Sartre shout-out in a kid's show, the idea of entering a seemingly innocent seeming park, only to learn that you are trapped there forever... That's a genuinely nightmarish idea, by which I mean I've often had nightmares of entering a building only to be unable to leave it.
As is typical for “Goosebumps,” any potency “One Day at Horrorland” could have had is squandered by an excess of goofy bullshit and a total lack of any sense of danger. The cheapness of the program is unavoidable. All the Horrors are made up of two different types of green, horned, goblin masks. One is more expressive while the other is entirely still. The attractions that are supposedly so traumatizing to Lizzy and Luke do not strike me as especially intense. She is lead around a hall of mirrors that ends with her getting dropped through a trap door... To the outside of the fun house. The second ride is like a flume log lazy river ride, except in caskets. And that's entirely it! The game show sequence is mostly an excuse for half-assed jokes and bits. Such as an advertisement for a CD of monster-themed love songs. It seems to be building towards an actual grim climax, until a minor supporting character appears to save the family!
That is probably my biggest problem with “Goosebumps,” as an entire enterprise. The characters are ridiculously one-note and often obnoxious. Such as the obnoxiously stupid parents here or screeching little brother. However, the complete lack of any stakes to all these stories makes them essentially a series of scenes amounting to no meaning at all. Life or death is not necessary for a horror story to be effective. However, there has to be some reasons for this. When the Morris parents insist on participating with the monster-themed game show, because of the promise of a new car, that almost struck me as a commentary on greed. Instead, it simply because another phrase the script repeats over and over again. I know “Goosebumps” is a nostalgic favorite for some but I grew up with this show and these books too and I still think this shit blows ass. [4/10]
I've written before about the potency of the idea of a carnival, amusement park, or circus being used as a setting for a horror story. The contrast between engineered but safe thrills with decidedly not-so-safe thrills is fertile ground. There's exactly two moments in “One Day at Horrorland” that touches on some of these ideas. Shortly after arriving at Horrorland, the kids spot what appears to be a costumed performer holding a decapitated human head. The head then speaks, informing them not to go on the guillotine ride. Hey, that's a mildly gruesome, almost morbidly funny moment! Meanwhile, at the end of the first half-hour – this was originally a two-part episode – the family are faced with a locked gate and a sign reading “No Exit.” Aside from being a Sartre shout-out in a kid's show, the idea of entering a seemingly innocent seeming park, only to learn that you are trapped there forever... That's a genuinely nightmarish idea, by which I mean I've often had nightmares of entering a building only to be unable to leave it.
That is probably my biggest problem with “Goosebumps,” as an entire enterprise. The characters are ridiculously one-note and often obnoxious. Such as the obnoxiously stupid parents here or screeching little brother. However, the complete lack of any stakes to all these stories makes them essentially a series of scenes amounting to no meaning at all. Life or death is not necessary for a horror story to be effective. However, there has to be some reasons for this. When the Morris parents insist on participating with the monster-themed game show, because of the promise of a new car, that almost struck me as a commentary on greed. Instead, it simply because another phrase the script repeats over and over again. I know “Goosebumps” is a nostalgic favorite for some but I grew up with this show and these books too and I still think this shit blows ass. [4/10]
No comments:
Post a Comment