nick121235 Reviews

The Case of the Bloody Iris (1972)

Quintessential

[8/10 · 26 May 2024]

The quintessential giallo. A perfect example of the golden age of early 70s giallo, replete with gorgeous outfits, a wonderfully modern and terrifying apartment building, a blasé and postmodern approach to violence, hilariously inappropriate music, and zooms galore. Everything about this is everything that giallo "essentially" is at its core, and although there are a few times I wish the excess could have been amped up and the sensuality more lurid and less hinted at, perhaps that's what makes this a good example of the original score of gialli; after all, it was the tendency of filmmakers to move further towards sex and violence at the expense of atmosphere and mis-en-scene that led to the collapse of the genre.

Again, this is just about the perfect giallo film. There is, unfortunately, not much to set it apart, but I also don't think that's necessary when it comes to the well made core gialli. This one is perfect, as an introduction or to rewatch for the 20th time.

Blue Eyes of the Broken Doll (1974)

Almost Italian

[7/10 · 20 May 2024]

Honestly I did not remember I'd watched this film before until the very end so I guess that tells you how memorable it is. Nonetheless, it is a genuinely good film. I've always been a bigger film of Italian films in this vein than the Spanish ones, as the latter rarely focus on the decor and fashion the way the Italian ones do, but this one clearly takes more inspiration from Italian films than usual, and that's probably why I liked it so much.

That isn't to say the visuals are the only thing that matter here. The mis-en-scene is certainly well done but the plot is good as well. It is a nice little murder mystery that really keeps you guessing who the killer is until the very end. Typical, it has many red herrings and misleading plot points, in the end not quite wrapping everything up, but that's par for the course when it comes to giallo. This is a good movie, even if I actually forgot completely that I'd ever seen it.

Kill, Baby... Kill! (1966)

Truly great

[10/10 · 15 May 2024]

Keep in mind that this is gothic film, not a giallo- but what a gothic film it is! Probably one of the best ever made, Bava's use of color, dreamlike surrealism in several scenes, and dizzying, symbolic imagery elevates this movie above and beyond most Italian horror.

Clearly drawing heavily from Hammer horror, Kill Baby Kill looks not the slightest bit natural; everything from the inside of the houses to the baroque and dismal buildings and streets to the cemeteries and even nature itself has the clear mark of being a set, looking like a stage play with nothing natural about it- and that's absolutely wonderful! If you're a fan of Hammer you'll know that this often works wonderfully for slow, ostentatious, gothic films.

The fact that an Italian director known for his creation of the giallo and slasher genres may have made the best gothic film of all time might be a crazy assertion to make, but it is exactly the one I'm making here. Bava has made other great films in the same genre, such as The Whip and the Body, and the inimitable classic Black Sunday, but Kill Baby Kill is where he finally perfected the genre, even as he moved away from it for good. The slow pacing, the focus on atmosphere, visuals, symbolism; the storyline that you can't quite put together but that fits together with the logic of the dream or nightmare- all of this elevates the film above the rest, and paves the way for what would become that most unique and strange of all genres, the giallo.

Bava was a master of many genres, but this film marks a highlight, not only of his own oeuvre, but of the gothic and even of horror in general. A genuine classic if ever there was one, and one of the most beautiful films ever made.

Masters of Horror: Chocolate (2005) Season 1, Episode 5

Fantasy life

[7/10 · 9 April 2024]

I like this, Mick Garris is a better director than I used to think. The focus on characterization is really strong and I think that's a good thing, although he didn't have enough runtime to make have both a strong horror plot and build up the character development, so unfortunately this ended up being mostly drama with some horror pushed in at the end. It would have worked better with a longer runtime but that's okay because this is still good. Maybe it's the loneliness and willingness to love someone even when they've done some truly horrible. I always imagine myself in these positions, i want to love someone even to the point of crossing acceptable boundaries, even when it is no longer okay I will give them everything i have. I guess this story just appeals to my neurotic fantasy.

I don't know why I used to think Mick Garris sucked cause I just looked at my imdb and pretty much everything by him I have rated 7 it 8. And btw it's fun to imagine this as a depiction of a man's descent into mental illness, from his point of view. Although that isn't what the short is trying to give us, it's still fun.

The Thing (1982)

Lovecraft will never see a better adaptation

[10/10 · 7 April 2024]

The best Lovecraft film ever made and the best Lovecraft film that ever will be made. I would also suggest one of the best films period ever made.

The pacing is immaculate, the 2 hour runtime allows the tension to build slowly, the suspicion to simmer, and the movie never feels overlong or padded. The cinematography is A+ as always with Carpenter, hearkening back to the big budget productions of the 40s and 50s with its beautiful noirish camera placements and gorgeous wide shots. Of course I have to touch on the special effects... as you doubtless know, some of the best ever made, truly giving a sense of gruesome horror. The way the characters are affected by an alien, Lovecraftian lifeform, too disturbing to comprehend... well, it really seeps into the rest of the movie, tangling up with the aura of suspicion where nobody is ever sure that anyone is truly who they are; this is a truly primal fear, the fear of the uncanny, and it awakens something deep within the viewer, a childlike fear that cannot be easily dismissed.

Throughout the film, the paranoia heightens. The alien becomes more intelligent, better at imitating human life. How can you know the person you're looking at is really them? How can you really ever know another person at all? Aren't they just the idea you construct of them? What's the difference if the world is populated by humans or aliens who are absolutely perfectly imitating humans? Are we really who we think we are? Isn't what we really fear the Other that we see in ourselves? Perhaps the monster is what we fear the Other truly is when we cannot see them as a true subject.

I guess I don't really have any kind of deep analysis today, feeling tired and brain dead, but this is genuinely an incredible movie and it deserves a deep analysis, I'm sure there's many out there. Just the idea of being unable to discern whether the Other is true or an imitation... it rings so true of reality, of anxieties we genuinely do feel and fear. This may be my 5th time watching this film but I can't wait to watch it again.

Hidden Kisses (2016 TV Movie)

Good and bad

[7/10 · 10 January 2024]

Damn, sad that this reminds me of being in high school and how my parents treated me, I must have repressed some of that cause I always though high school wasn't that bad but almost every single thing in this movie happened to me except the over the top beatings and actually having someone who wanted to kiss me. In fact, the story seems like over the top victim fetishization but I can say that that's true only to some degree... anyway I have to say I wish a guy that liked me would beat me up because he hates himself for being gay, but then realizes he's in love with me, in fact I fantasize about this very thing happening to me all the time. What other reason is there to live quite honestly. Oh and I screamed when the teacher decided to introduce Oscar Wilde to the class after one of his students was just beaten up for being gay.

Now is this movie over the top? Yes... yes, very much, especially in the way that it veers into preachiness occasionally. I would have liked something with less of a soap opera feel. It's totally awkward, but still a good story. It did redeem itself, no matter how dramatic; it was very emotional, so that overcame some of the other issues.

Clairevoyant (2021)

I am contesting the love it or hate it claim

[6/10 · 23 November 2023]

I feel like this is completely my sense of humor but that... a lot of people who watched it and said "you either love it or hate it" don't usually watch this type of movie. It's clearly low budget which is fine but it was very sparse, and not just the mise-em-scene but the plot too. It really could have had a little bit more stakes. I'm thinking SAFE by Todd Haynes. I wanted her to join a cult or something, she was the perfect personality type. The ending was pretty cool though, and the conversation with the mother was also great. It was pretty good, hopefully these guys can get more funding cause they might be able to do something cool.

Mardi Gras Massacre (1978)

Actually good

[7/10 · 21 October 2023]

Basically Herschell Gordon Lewis film for the late 70s, bad but hilarious with a lot of focus on gore and guts, terrible plot, terrible dialogue, terrible sets, but funny and with great music and, despite the fact that I prefer the early 70s, a great late 70s feel and look (if you can get over the cheapness) that I do really enjoy. I would watch it again just for the music, such sexy funk basslines. The outfits are pretty great too but unless you're already into 70s fashion that is very dated and of its era, I don't suppose that is going to convince you to watch the film. Nonetheless, it is enjoyable.

It (1990)

The conflict

[7/10 · 28 September 2023]

Wonderful camera work. This movie will always hold a fond place in my heart.

This time, watching, I realized a few things. These aren't necessarily true about the movie or the novel and the intentions of the writers thereof but it helped me to see this. The idea that only children can see IT and adults can't is reminiscent of the difference between the mindset of the adult and the child, their potentials. The child is able to "play", he is able to be his entire self; he is not yet restricted by social normativity all the way, not yet closed off to the fullness of his entire, authentic self. Adults have taken on a role, they have taken an "identity". Their Imaginary (in the Lacanian sense) is narrowed. It only includes those things that social norms dictate as real and acceptable. On the other hand, the Imaginary of the child is far more expanded. It includes many things that are not accessible to adults, it includes so many potential realities and possible futures! These children are able to "play" to exist in a reality, or rather an Imaginary, that is inaccessible to adults, because these children are fully authentic, not yet forced into world of "growing up" in which their reality and identities will be narrowed.

The other concept I'm grappling with here is the idea of IT as the "Other". Bear with me here. IT is a clear cut example of the pure Other, a black and white scenario in which there is the subject and the Other; it is, naturally, the children's task to eliminate this Other. This Other is pure hatred, but not just that, the hatred and collective historical violence of the town. Is this not always something children find inexplicable, absolutely shocked that this could exist in the world? To children it is actually ridiculous, simply stupid that this violence and hatred exists at all. 'Why don't we just stop? Why don't humans just feel the innocence and love that I feel? There's no reason for this sort of thing, it should simply end'.

This story is the unconscious conflict brought to the surface, acted out in reality so that it can be eliminated. This incomprehensible violence takes an identifiable form, one that can actually be attacked. Is this not what Marx and Fascists have tried to do? And, please, do not take my statement in the wrong way, I most certainly do not think they are on the same level and only use both of them for one reason- they are good examples of what I'm trying to point out in this movie, in the subtext, or at least my interpretation of it. In this film, violence takes on a specific identity so that it can be attacked and eliminated. For Hitler, the problems of capitalism (among other things) were sublimated or, rather, transposed into the Jew. He believed that once they we eliminated all evils would end. For Marx, we simply have to destroy the bourgeoisie and these issues will all be over, capitalism will end and we will reach a communist utopia. Reality is much more complicated, capitalism and its structures are much more rhizomatic, elimination of one face of capital doesn't end capitalism, it simply takes on a new form, pops up elsewhere. I say all this to point out that the children's play takes a form in which this aversion to the cold realities of inexplicable violence, racism, and hatred in the world they live in now takes an identifiable form, one that they can attack. The Other is a terrifying physical clown, but a visible enemy that can be defeated nonetheless. I know this is already far too long so I'll end here. This may be nothing but I found myself highly entertained once again, and with new perspectives that I never saw on other viewings.

"I am eternal. I am the eater of worlds and of children."

Buried Alive (1989)

It had potential

[4/10 · 27 September 2023]

When the movie first started I was simply very let down. First of all, this girl walks out to the highway where she immediately gets attacked by a guy in what appears to be a Ronald Reagan mask and she almost gets away but, very conveniently, there is a random chute right there under the grass that he pushes her into which leads to his underground bunker... where he bricks her up to die? Who would take the time to create an entire underground bunker in order to get away with murder just to brick someone up behind a way so they can slowly starve to death? It honestly just seems like they wanted SO badly to shove Poe references into the movie that they were willing to do anything.

Them comes the psychoanalysis and my opinion improves. It reminds me of the reason I got into psychoanalysis in the first place, because of how dated it sounds, specifically to the era of 40s and 50s film noir dime store psychology. It is so fun and campy. I'm more into it now so I can see the obvious ways they misuse analytic concepts but it is still highly enjoyable for me because they make it so much more FUN. But I digress, because the usage here is actually not far off. The idea of the internalized other, the superego, is what underlies this film in part, and it is most certainly an interesting concept. By the way, what exactly is "viewing the world as a warped projection of your own superego" as one psychiatrist, played by Donald Pleasance (his acting is amazing in this movie btw- as always) says about a particularly troubled girl? Do we not all do this? The superego, or Lacanian Imaginary in another sense perhaps, is a filter, a mediator through which we all view the world in part. Isn't it impossible to see the world for what it really is? Only someone completely lacking a conscience could possibly see the world without this filter and their own ego is so large that it completely warps their understanding of society and the world. There is no objective view of the world, we are all born already into a social context and personal context that completely colors our perception of society, of reality, and of our own selves. Perhaps this is one of their playful jokes using analytic terminology.

This is not a great movie but it really does try with the noir references, for instance the scene at the beginning where our main character falls asleep on the side of the road in her car and is awoken by a police officer (I absolutely adore the car she's driving by the way, it is incredibly late 80s-early 90s). I like how they chose to make him knock on the other side of the door, however. It's also worthy of note that the idea of the superego is something that references Marion Crane in Psycho and her decision to go back and return the money she stole- but also, more obliquely but more importantly- Norman's motivation for killing. After his mother's death, his internalized voice of her's, his superego, became so much stronger that it took on the form of a new personality, punishing him, and other people, for the desires he held; something we all do in much smaller ways in our own daily lives. But I'll save the Psycho analysis for a viewing of that film.

This movie really is interesting because it seems like the writer wanted to make a piece of art, the director didn't care, the studio couldn't really get that much money and forced in rewrites and new scenes, and the actors are just bad at their job. There's a much better movie hidden in here somewhere. It's also bizarre that I decided to go in depth on a random cheap movie but give two sentence reviews for movies I like much more. That's just how I am I guess.

Curtains (1983)

Made for tv?

[5/10 · 22 September 2023]

Idk, it kind of just feels like a particularly gory episode of Murder She Wrote. I don't love it but I don't hate it. I have a friend who is a horror aficionado and he absolutely loves this movie and I just can't figure out why. That being said, I like the idea behind it. I wish it had given a little more atmosphere because the whole being out in this huge mansion in the middle of nowhere in a snowy storm, being picked off one by one... could totally work, and sounds right up my alley. Unfortunately, it just feels made for tv; there no atmosphere at all to be found. The plot is fun, but somewhat contrived. The only enjoyment to be found, really, is in figuring out who the killer is. It isn't bad and it isn't good. It's worth watching at least once if you like 80's slashers.

Bloody Birthday (1981)

Fun

[8/10 · 20 September 2023]

Goes so far into being bad that it's back to being good again- great even. I mean come on though, how can you not be a "so bad it's good" film with a premise like "three babies born during a solar eclipse turn out to be psychopaths (i guess the eclipse caused it?) and become little kid serial killers 10 years later". It would be impossible for this movie not to be hilarious unless it was just incredibly boring and this film is certainly never that.

Honestly, besides the hilariously bad premise and ridiculousness of watching 10 year old children carry out these brutal movies it isn't a bad movie- in fact, it's rather good. It always keeps you engaged and on the edge of your seat without turning into a run on of action scenes. It does exactly what it is supposed to do which is be a tense slasher movie, and it LOOKS great. The vintage look of cheap early 80s film, the fashion and decor, it's just classic.

It's a bit difficult for me to explain why I like this film so much, it really isn't much other than a complete exploitation of the slasher genre, and honestly if it was made in the mid or late 80s I think it would have lost this charm it has, but the combination of style and pure exploitation is something I've always been a sucker for. This movie is straight up fun and for me that makes it a 8 out of 10 on the level of enjoyability.

The Pit (1981)

Magical realism

[9/10 · 19 September 2023]

I'm not sure if my expectations of this movie being bad colored by enjoyment of it in a positive manner but I absolutely loved this movie! It is the sort of movie I always end up enjoying, personal stories from the point of view of a troubled kid. Growing up with mental illness is hard, you always feel like nobody understands you and the truth is that, unlike many of your peers who also feel the same way, the adults in your life likely don't understand you. They've never had to deal with the problems you have and have no idea how to relate to you, your friends don't either and this is vague internet (more so for him than me but I didn't have very much access to it either) so you end up just turning inwards, creating a rich fantasy life for yourself for better or worse. Luckily my fantasy world was and is a positive escape for me but for the kid in the movie it leads to disaster.

It's not just feeling a personal identification with the main character that makes me like this film, however. For one thing it looks good, the cinematography and locations and everything are all nice though obviously not expensive; for another it is downright hilarious. I think the filmmakers one exactly what they were doing when they made the kid this weird so it isn't actually down to bad writing, they wanted to make him shockingly weird and it works.

I have to say, however, that my favorite but understated aspect of the film is its poetic mood. I would call this film a work of magic realism, one with a symbolic and magical atmosphere, with fantastic occurrences seamlessly and easily woven into straight realism. The tone of the film is easily missed but if you pay attention you'll see it has an almost mesmerizing mood, that is to say, one of hypnotism or uncanniness.

I think this movie is way underappreciated. It isn't a high budget movie or any kind of slasher but it is a really good story on its own terms, that of a kid dealing with mental illness and issues that escalate into horror, and an effort at the atmospheric.

Dark Water (2002)

More than just horror

[9/10 · 18 September 2023]

This movie is so cozy and atmospheric; I absolutely love the feel of this movie, I love the rainy urban locations, I love the feeling of uneasiness that pervades from that bleak apartment, I love the vintage look of the analogue film. So glad this wasn't done in digital, as it well could have been, being shot in 2003.

The story is essentially about a mother going through a divorce. As her husband uses dirty tricks she begins to unravel, and we are unclear as to what occurrences are due to him and which are due to her sanity or possibly even ghosts or malevolent spirits.

While the portrayal of a woman losing her mind amidst a custody battle is a very convincing one, the apartment building is basically the star of this film for me. The stark concrete walls and constant aura of gloominess just invades your brain while watching. It has more personality than even the house in Amityville haha, I just love it. It is imposing, terrifying, and has that feeling of urban hopelessness that I, for some reason, adore. Every time she leaves the apartment I find myself wishing for her to return, although it it obviously the worst choice she can make. This movie is both a personal drama and a terrifying horror movie and it plays both parts convincingly.

There's not one wrong step in the whole movie. The horror is always more atmospheric than apparent, but at the same time there are still many great and terrifying visuals. This keeps the horror shrouded and tense, psychological, but when it needs to up the stakes it absolutely brings out the big guns and hits us with something scary. It never goes overboard nor does it understate the horror like some films that try to be arthouse horror do (but end up not being horror at all); basically it is a perfect mix of drama, psychological horror, and truly scary stuff. Coming from the director of the original Ring that absolutely makes sense. Also this movie sometimes reminds me of the beginning of Coraline, which I love. Like I said, so cozy- beautifully shot, morose, scary, chilling, and cozy. Will definitely be rewatching this one.

Amityville II: The Possession (1982)

Really good, actually.

[7/10 · 17 September 2023]

I would have loved to see this in high quality. I get why many people think this is better than the first, it is very enjoyable but I think they're both great in very different ways. They're both campy but they have different flavors of camp; the first film was campy in the gialloesque deadly serious arthouse way and the second is campy in a 1980s cheese type way. In neither case do I think they are trying to be funny but they are nonetheless.

And yet, this film still has a lot of value. It may be cheesy but the plot is always fun and engaging, which is more than I can say for the first movie- in short, the 1979 film prized atmosphere while this one focuses on plot. That isn't to say, however, that it does not take itself seriously outside of that, for instance the camera work is better than you would expect and is sometimes even great.

The plot is rather emotional, giving us a look at a dysfunctional family and how it breeds its own demons. This is no character study but it has a lot more to it than one would expect. It sort of gives me ANOES 2 vibes, being the second in a horror franchise and yet already subverting the rules given by the first; taking a teenage guy and making him and his problems the locus of the horror rather than the external evil of the first film (although he's obviously no innocent, but maybe we can chalk that up to possession- props to the makers of this film for making the demon truly transgressive rather than simply blasphemous; profaning the church is no longer shocking). For that reason, this film is more personal than first.

Overall I can't say whether I like this or the first Amityville Horror more, I will simply have to give them equal ratings; but I can say that they are both good in very different ways, and so you cannot watch this one expecting it to be a continuation of the atmosphere and story of the first one. Oh, and by the way, the special effects are great.

The Corruption of Chris Miller (1973)

Psychological Thriller

[8/10 · 23 August 2023]

I am absolutely LIVING for the cinematography it is so skilled. Another MASSIVE pro is the decor-this house is 100 percent perfectly done. It's done in that late 60s early 70s style I just adore and would be so lucky to be able to replicate in my own house someday. Locations? Brilliant. All of them. That house is definitely worth over a million bucks today. Those archways?? Beautiful. If they weren't defiled in the 90s that is. I love the use of atmosphere, it's so bleak here.

This is one of a row of early 70s films that were stylistically influenced by the Italian giallo genre, that had gained such popular cachet in the latter country, and as such it flirts with the style but never really fully jumps into it headfirst. For some reason, this fact is belied in the locations; there's a marked (though possibly minor) difference in the trees and general wildlife between the two countries that I always pick up on but (not being versed in the subject at all) can't really describe. Back to the subject of the giallo in Spanish film- this movie may take the trappings of the giallo (magnitude of mise-en-scene, such as focus on artistic and fluid cinematography, widescreen with a baroque and ostentatious set full of decoration, liberal use of beautiful locations for a horror film) but the focus is still, here, on a coherent and tight psychological thriller type plot, and so we see that its goals are different from those of the true, Italian giallo film. It also misses nearly necessary elements such as a black gloved killer (and that infamous straight razor). To repeat my earlier statement, this is one of a row of Spanish films that takes influence from the genre, which was centred in, and mostly only really ever existed in, Italy.

As for the plot, which is the main focus of the movie, it is very good. Half of the movie is used to build up the characters, although it doesn't really do the best it could have done in that vein it makes a solid effort; this first half also focuses on establishing the toxic relationship between the stepmother and daughter. The second half gives us a murder mystery, delving into the slasher/giallo type of plot trope, and since it's given us such a good build up we're actually left caring about who's doing the killing (caring as in truly wondering). This latter half does a phenomenal job at building up an atmosphere of dread, suspense, and nail-biting engagement. A great psychological thriller from Spain with giallo-esque characteristics. Beautiful.

The French Sex Murders (1972)

Cheaply made

[5/10 · 20 August 2023]

This one looks very cheaply made but it has a somewhat innovative plot. Did they still execute people by guillotine in france in the 70s? Cause if so i'm sorry but I was laughing when the judge doled out that sentence. Regardless, this one almost seems more noir-ish than I would have expected, it's a pretty interesting movie and hard to classify. It may be classified as a giallo but it seems to only have made the barest effort to be one, most likely it was made for that milieu but the ideas about it were scattered; it seems to like action but also wants to add in a police procedural element. It's all over the place. Unfortunately the low budget is very visible in this movie, and the kills are just annoying the way the color is always changing, but the plot is still engaging. You know what I finally realized after finishing the movie? This thing is closer to an American grindhouse film than anything else.

Eye in the Labyrinth (1972)

Not a classic, but good

[7/10 · 19 August 2023]

That score is fantastic. For some reason the version I watched was close up, I hate how they make all movies like that nowadays, Jess Franco does that too. Gialli are almost always very much widescreen and zoomed out, I'm not sure what the technical terms are for this but i'm almost certain this one was originally shot that way and the film was recut or cropped. It just looks like it was originally shot in a much more widescreen way, and like I said, all gialli are. I wish I could have seen it that way because it would have made the movie better, and this isn't a bad movie by any means. The lead is not typical for a giallo film, she's very fresh faced and young, the typical giallo lead girl wears glamorous makeup and is a bit more alluring and sexy. Locations are gorgeous, but the decor and outfits are a bit underwhelming. The plot has a surreal dream logic to it that I really enjoy- where some might see plot holes I see atmosphere and a feeling of the oneiric. This was a good movie despite it's failings. There's no way it could ever be a classic, but it's good. If you're ever feeling bored, just wait for the ending... what an ending!!

The Slayer (1982)

I like it for the wrong reasons

[8/10 · 14 August 2023]

It's giving The Beyond and Jose Ramon Larraz- and I'm living for it! Don't get me wrong, it's still an American slasher, but it's more surreal, more focused on the imagery and the mise-en-scene and atmosphere; and besides, i'm convinced it really references The Beyond itself. Whether or not I'm right is, of course, a matter of debate, but there's certainly something there, which is why this is essential for those of you who can't get enough of giallo and enjoy the influence it has occasionally had on work outside of it's milieu. Even if you don't take it that way, it's still a beautiful, expertly shot, and surreal slasher. Whichever way you want to look at it, it's great; besides, i'm convinced there's some sort of psychoanalytic value here that a film student could write a paper on the film using. Is that a pro or a con?

Daughters of Darkness (1971)

Some thoughts brought up by this film

[8/10 · 28 June 2023]

I think the vampire is an interesting character, because unlike human-beings it is *purely* driven by desire, with no real function but to obtain the object of its desire. But we know that the vampire is never truly fulfilled, as a character it lives forever but is never happy, it always regrets the choice that it has made. You could say that the unconscious object of the vampire's desire is actually death, which is also its barrier to enjoyment because it is always already dead. It lives constantly in that liminal space, always on the verge of attaining the true object of desire, but never completely overcoming that barrier, always chasing its nominal, conscious object of desire (blood), which only prolongs its suffering and defers the ultimate desire. It is in a space between enjoyment and suffering, between obtaining and deferring enjoyment. It is the human-being stripped bare of all the building blocks that make it a total, holistic, psychic being; reduced to the personification of capital itself, of jouissance.

Henry Gamble's Birthday Party (2015)

Great character development

[8/10 · 22 June 2023]

Um this was really good. The dialogue was very natural which can be hard to do, it was just very good; the plot was also very good, despite the fact that it sometimes meandered it was never for no reason, every scene contributed to the character development which was another thing that this film did phenomenally well, and not just for the main character but for many of the characters (obviously there are side characters that didn't need to be fleshed out). Pacing was good, i never got bored; the only things that I didn't absolutely love about this film was the cinematography and locations, there wasn't really a problem with either but they were both just kind of boring, the locations were nothing special and the decor was boring. These things were probably intentional, the focus here is on the great story and dialogue so there's go reason to use fancy decor and camera work to take away from it- those are just things that I personally focus on in films. I'm gonna be honest this hit me a little too close to home so it was hard to watch but it was worth it.

Byzantium (2012)

Surprisingly good

[8/10 · 20 June 2023]

It starts off rocky but slowly gets better, piece by piece falling into place, until the story just starts to make sense. It coalesces and you forgive some of the less than stellar pacing choices and awkward action scenes. This is a slow burner but when it finally ignites you won't regret staying until the end. Clear Let the Right One In influence but we need more vampire films in that vein so that's definitely not a bad thing. It really gets you into the characters, it makes you care about them. I was very surprised by how much I ended up enjoying this film. I really needed to sleep but I ended up forcing myself to finish, it was just so engaging. I may have cried a little bit.

Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth (1992)

Right in the middle

[5/10 · 24 March 2023]

Overall, the appearance of the third film in the Hellraiser franchise is very workmanlike, more "tv film" than the imagery of the first two Hellraiser movies. However, it is not a bad looking movie. Despite being less creative in its surreal imagery than the previous movie, the cinematography in Hell on Earth is not bad by any means, and there are many good looking shots. In fact, the cinematography itself is probably a 7-8 on a scale of 10. This is one of the aspects of the movie that I really enjoyed

The sculpture is also an interesting new addition, being something that doesn't exist in the first movie and is drawn from an image shown in the very last few seconds of Hellbound. It's nice to see a completely new plot point added to the series here, and to build a new sort of story out of elements of the old.

The plot is serviceable, obviously very different from the first two films but fun in and of itself. It's very cheesy of course, but that's one of the things that makes it fun. And it helps that it attempts to be comedic which is sometimes necessary for franchise sequels. It's too bad the only hot guy in the movie died in the first 1/3rd of the movie though.

Another thing I wanted to touch on is that although the backstory for Pinhead is an interesting exploration of the end of the previous film and a novel idea, it just doesn't work for me. Pinhead should not be humanized, it makes the film less scary, in the same way that Rob Zombie's Halloweens neutered the horror of Michael. Unfortunately it turns this film into a halfway sci-fi film rather than a full horror.

So, do I hate this movie? No. In fact, it's probably the last enjoyable film of the franchise until much later on. But is it a good movie? Also no. It's more of a fun movie than a good one, with a myriad of problems but enough good attributes so as to still be worth watching, at least if you're into Hellraiser. So, for that reason, I put it smack in the middle and give it a 5 out of 10.

Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988)

Better than I remember

[8/10 · 24 March 2023]

I decided to go ahead and rewatch the entire Hellraiser franchise after watching the newest release. This one is better than what I remember. I probably just unfairly compared it to the first film before. I still think it takes too much from Nightmare on Elm Street rather than the energy of the first film and the recaps are kind of annoying but... it's good. As opposed to the "intellectualism" of the first one, Hellbound goes more for horrifying imagery. However, I think that imagery in itself is interesting high quality; it almost felt like it took inspiration from The Beyond (1979) but I'm not sure if that's actually the case or if it's just cause The Beyond is also structured around this idea of gratuitous horrifying surrealism being more central to the film than the plot.

Overall, the second Hellraiser film is not as good as the first one but it is still a very good film in itself, even if its goals are different. That desire to give us something new is just what franchise films should be doing.

The Hidden Room (1949)

Enjoyable, but he can do better

[6/10 · 8 March 2023]

Went back and rewatched this one after seeing Murder, my Sweet (1944), as they were both directed by the same man. But unfortunately I didn't enjoy this as much as last time, perhaps it just paled in comparison to Murder, my Sweet- I mean it certainly does regardless, considering the high quality of that film, but I'm not sure if that's the reason for my not seeming to enjoy Obsession as much as I ostensibly did the last time I watched it or if my rating system has just shifted over time.

Either way this certainly isn't a bad film but neither is it great, and I know this director in particular can do better. It also isn't a noir, despite what IMDB might say.