Halloween 2019: September 28th

Anaconda (1997)

Now the time has come where the dumb-shit studio blockbusters of my childhood are being re-evaluated as premium trash entertainment, accidental masterpieces of ironic hipster enjoyment. 1997's “Anaconda” was part of a wave of films at the time that retrofitted B-movie premises with big budget special effects, and then pitched themselves right at the pre-teen boy crowd. As someone who was nine years old in 1997, I can attest to this strategy's success. I didn't see “Anaconda” in theaters but I can vividly recall watching it multiple times on VHS. Furthermore, it was enthusiastically discussed across my elementary school playground. And now, just the other day, someone in the film group I'm a member of on Facebook was jokingly declaring “Anaconda” the greatest movie of the decade. What goes around, comes around, I guess.

Documentary filmmaker Terri Flores and researcher Steven Cale lead an expedition down the Amazon River. They head into the heart of the jungle in search of the Shirishamas, a mysterious and elusive tribe of native residents. Along the way, they pick up professional poacher Paul Serone. Serone has been tracking the giant green anaconda of legend that is said to protect the Shirishamas' territory. When they encounter the giant snake and it starts killing off members of the crew, Serone takes over the boat and drives them further into the forbidden reaches of the Amazon.

“Anaconda” is an incredibly dumb movie. It's blatantly derivative of superior films like “Jaws” (with its Quint-like villain and aquatic monster P.O.V. shots), “Creature from the Black Lagoon” (its doomed Amazon expedition and the image of a blockade in the water), and “Predator.” (Yet more P.O.V. shots.) The anaconda eats someone early on, within ear-shot of the rest of the cast, but nobody notices. The characters are all the broadest of stereotypes, from the inner-city black guy, to the British snob, the snooty intellectual, the horny couple. Despite being set on a tiny, rickety boat, the characters still have time for luxuries like golf and sexy dancing. “Anaconda” is so dumb that we are pretty clearly not meant to take it seriously. This comedic streak is represented through a goofy shot of nails wobbling through the air or Ice Cube being introduced by talking about a good day.

Not that I would expect a movie about a giant killer snake to take itself especially seriously. As a jumbo-sized slither thriller, “Anaconda” is occasionally a lot of cheesy fun. The large animatronic prop used to bring the anaconda to life is pretty stiff in its movement. But it also has a cartoonish charm, with the perpetual sneer its highly expressive face is given. The sequences of the snake slowly crushing humans or a panther have a grisly, nasty energy to them I appreciate. Director Luis Llosa, previously of “The Specialist” and lots of low budget action schlock, throws in some fun camera angles. Such as the camera peering out of the snake's throat as it swallows Serone alive. As cheesy as they are, the practical effects hold up a lot better than the dreadful looking CGI. The numerous shots of the computer-generated snake coiling around its victims, or the impression of someone's face through the animal's belly, are charmless in their rubbery weightlessness.

The big fake snake is the real star of the show but “Anaconda” still felt the need to assemble an all-star cast. Jon Voight decimates the scenery as Serone, whose Paraguayan accent sounds a lot like a Christopher Walken impression. Voight literally winks at the audience throughout the film, even after his flesh is left boiled from the snake's stomach enzymes. It's a monstrously hammy performance and a high-light of the film. A lot of the other performances are on a similarly campy wavelength. Ice Cube and Jonathan Hyde know exactly what kind of movie they are in, playing their parts like the cartoon characters they are. Jennifer Lopez and Eric Stoltz, as our heroine and her intellectual love interest, play things a little more straight. Owen Wilson and Kari Wuhrer, left in the indistinct roles as the would-be humpers, have fewer chances to express themselves.

Despite being a gussied-up exploitation film, “Anaconda” was a proper blockbuster in its day. It won its first two box office weekends and grossed 136 million globally against a 45 million dollar budget. A pretty good return on the studios' investment. However, the various sequels that followed “Anaconda” were unquestionably actual B-movie. The firsts, following seven years later, somehow appeared in theaters but the others – which include a versus flick with “Lake Placid” – debuted on DVD or the Syfy Channel. As for the original, I can hardly call it a '90s trashterpiece. It's definitely amusing and Voight's grotesque disregard of actorly tact is amazing to watch. But the movie is often as tedious as it is fun. [6/10]

Tales of Terror (1962)

Through his first three attempts to adapt the stories of Edgar Allan Poe, Roger Corman and his team ran into the same problem. It's hard to expand a short story into a feature film. When the movie just spun-off into its own story, such as in “The Pit and the Pendulum,” this wasn't much of an issue. But you definitely felt the strain of adaptation in “The Premature Burial.” So a novel solution was suggested for the fourth entry in the Poe Cycle. “Tales of Terror” would be an omnibus feature, packing together three different Poe stories. Naturally, Vincent Price would star in each segment while other classic genre stars, Peter Lorre and Basil Rathbone, were invited along. Obviously the public had no problem with this change in approach, as “Tales of Terror” was another box office success.

Price also narrates the wrap-around segment, an eerie series of voice-overs over images of beating hearts and dripping blood. (Which invokes the strangely absent “Tell-Tale Heart.”) In “Morella,” the sickly Lenora returns to her father's home. He blames her for the death of her mother, the titular Morella, during childbirth. The daughter's return summons up Moella's vengeful spirit. In “The Black Cat,” alcoholic Montresor abuses his wife and her pet cat when he isn't drinking. While at a wine-tasting, he meets Fortunato Luchresi. Fortunato and the wife begin an affair, which prompts Montresor to murderous action. Guilt is not so easily covered up though. Finally, in “The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar,” the rich Mr. Valdemar allows himself to be hypnotized at the moment of death by Mr. Carmichael. Carmichael keeps Valdemar in a mesmerized state of undeath, exploiting his riches and trying to steal his wife. This doesn't work out too well for the crooked hypnotist.

Opening “Tales of Terror” with a less well-known Poe story like “Morella,” even a relatively loose adaptation like this, was an interesting decision. Though it does feature a lot of Poe's trademark themes – guilt, a dead lover, a sickly maiden, alcoholism – so maybe that motivated the choice. The segment is most notable for the cobweb strewn, spooky old mansion it is set in. (Supposedly recycled from “House of Usher.”) The scene where the ghost of Morella, depicted as a shadowy silhouette with spindly fingers, creeps over Lorena's sleeping form is among “Tales of Terror's” spookiest moments. Price's performance is quite good, as he's pulled between the resentment he feels towards his daughter and his familial bond with her. However, the story has a somewhat anticlimactic ending and ends up feeling somewhat minor.

“The Black Cat,” which has more in common with “The Cask of Amontillado,” shifts gear from the grim gothic tone that has directed these films up to this point. Instead, it's a farce and a damn fun one. Peter Lorre is hilarious as the belligerent, usually drunk Montresor. A scene where he harasses random bystanders for cash is hysterical. Price plays Fortunato as the dandiest of foppish dandies, giving in totally into the camp tendencies that always floated under his performance. (To the point were it's absolutely inconceivable that Fortunato would have any interest in Montresor's wife.) Watching these two legends play off each other is worth the price of admission by itself, especially during the bitterly funny live entombment moment. Montresor's drunken hallucinations allows Corman to include his trademark psychedelic sequence, which features random lobsters and a live decapitation.

With its final segment, Corman and Matheson set about adapting one of Poe's most frightening stories. This particular take on “The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar” does maintain the chilling sequences of the dead, hypnotized Valdemar describing a cold, isolated afterlife. Price's droning delivery of doom-filled intonings was made for exactly this kind of thing. Basil Rathbone is nicely nasty as the duplicitous hypnotist. Corman confines most of the story to the same two rooms, shooting through the leaping embers of a fireplace or in multi-colored close-ups of Price's lifeless face. The final shock of the story is fantastically delivered, with what are some unnervingly gooey special effects for 1962.

While the first and last segment both feature some strong moments, the comedic middle chapter made the biggest impression on the filmmakers and audiences. Corman, Matheson, Price, and Lorre would bring the same approach to “The Raven” the next year, with the added bonus of Boris Karloff. (I reviewed that film back in 2015, so it'll be excluded from this Blog-a-thon.) Much of the same team went around again with “The Comedy of Terrors” a year after that, Rathbone returning to the fold. All that aside, “Tales of Terror” is quite a solid collection of stories, each strong in their own ways. [7/10]

Tales from the Cryptkeeper: The Brothers Gruff

“Tales from the Crypt” rarely touched on monsters like goblins or trolls, forcing the kids cartoon spin-off to pick up the slack. “The Brothers Gruff” follows Eddie, who is constantly tormented by his older brother, Horace. Eddie's best friend is Sheldon, who is obsessed with mythological monsters and the various rules used to combat them. Eddie and Sheldon are convinced a troll lives under a near-by bridge. After running across it one day, Eddie starts to suspect the bridge troll followed him home. After Sheldon's advice proves unhelpful, the troll appears and kidnaps Horace. This forces the kid to venture under the troll's bridge and barter for his brother's return.

“The Brothers Gruff” looks like another “Tales from the Cryptkeeper” episode about learning to appreciate your asshole siblings. Considering Horace's teasing of Eddie graduates to full-blown emotional abuse, I'm glad the episode gives the older brother a proper comeuppance. The episode is narrated by Eddie, given a properly sardonic voice by Amos Crawley. However, the humor is this episode is a little too manic and hyper-active for my taste, especially once the (very annoying) bridge troll appears on-screen. However, I did really like the host segments. It's devoted to the Cryptkeeper playing cards with some friends and thankfully does not feature any obnoxious antics from the Old Witch or the Vaultkeeper. [5/10]

Forever Knight: Undue Process

“Undue Process” has to be one of “Forever Knight's” grimmer episode. The episode begins with Natalie's previously unmentioned god-daughter being kidnapped. A suspect, a known child molester, has been determined to be the likely perpetrator. The worst comes to pass, as the girl's lifeless body is found. Soon, a public manhunt ensues for the kidnapper. Only Nick intervening with his vampire powers prevents an act of vigilante justice. The troubles are only beginning, as a public defender comes to the accused man's defense, while Natalie handles her grief. Nick, meanwhile, thinks back to when he was the target of mob mentality.

“Undue Process” is a very confused episode. It wants to make a point about the evilness of mob justice. That's obviously what the scenes devoted to people on the street hunting down the accused child-killer and Nick's flashbacks are meant to convey. Yet, the episode eventually reveals, the guy actually did this heinous act. “Undue Process” tries to double-down on twists after that, concerning the motivations of the guy's public defenders, which only further confuses whatever this one is trying to get at. That scattered approach further makes the episode unable to handle the heaviness of a dead child. It's definitely one of the more unsatisfying hours in the series so far. [5/10]