universal_monster Reviews

Female Vampire (1973)

Tedious soft-core porn from one of cinema's biggest con artists.

[3 May 2008]

People will tell you all kinds of things about Jesus Franco. He's made about five billion films over the past five decades so he must be doing something right, right? Wrong! Nearly every single film I have seen of his reeks of Eurotrash amateurism. Even more depressingly, the man does not seem interested in making anything other than tedious soft-core porn with wafer thin plot lines that pretentious people like to claim is art because he'll throw in a shot of a mountain or the ocean every once in awhile. I guess some people just need to find an excuse to justify the fact they like watching porn, as if something like this somehow brings T&A flicks to a more respectable level. Unfortunately for Jess, many films from the same decade literally crush his lame efforts when it comes to style, plot, direction, acting and eroticism. "Les Avaleuses" or one of its five hundred different titles is nothing more than dull trash with neither the talent or imagination to make it worthy of note. Franco also is rather obnoxious any time you see him interviewed. He has an inflated sense of his own importance, which in the film-making world is almost nonexistent. On several occasions, I've even seen him insult far more talented directors whose ideas he in turn blatantly steals. I've often wondered if this man is obnoxious, clueless or just senile. It's hard to tell but one thing he is not is a good film director.

I hate even referring to this as a film. There is almost no plot and from a technical standpoint it is inept. Things going out of focus all the time is not art, it's laziness and incompetence on the part of someone more interested in zooming in on unkempt crotches than making a decent erotic vampire film. What storyline there is is basically gratuitous nude shots of Franco's wife Lina Romay repeated over and over again. Though a fairly attractive woman, once you've seen a few of these films you're already bored seeing her naked. She's not a very good actress either. She brings nothing to the film or her role other than what God gave her, some of which could use a good trimming. The others nude actresses on display here aren't especially attractive either. Unless you are an obsessive fan of this director (believe it or not, he does have fans) or can't get your hands on more explicit adult material, I wouldn't waste my time viewing this.

Last Stop on the Night Train (1975)

A shoddy, boring ripoff.

[4 May 2007]

Oh yeah baby, another terrible and overrated Italian exploitation film that deserves cult status about as much as "Elmo: The Movie." This one is an almost exact clone of Wes Craven's "Last House on the Left," which itself copied Ingmar Bergman's "The Virgin Spring." So what's to say about a copy of a copy? It turns out, not much. Two young women (one played by Irene Miracle from Argento's "Infero") are heading home for the holidays on a late night train. Two obnoxious punks (one played by Flavio Bucci from Argento's "Suspiria") and an equally sick upper class female (played by Macha Meril of Argento's "Deep Red") harass, humiliate, rape and ultimately murder both. The female goes back to her normal everyday life, while the punks end up at the home of one of the murdered girls. The parents find out what happened and get their revenge. After a painfully boring, terribly written first third, this has a brutal and tasteless middle, and caps it all off with an ineffective "revenge" finale that has absolutely no impact whatever and only succeed at being boring and insignificant. This film completely lacks suspense and really is just a third-rate knock-off of material done far better elsewhere. And what strikes me as funny is the number of people claiming this movie is "subtle." If you consider a girl being stabbed in the vagina and then a camera shot of the knife sticking out of her crotch to be "subtle," then you need to pick up a dictionary and look up what "subtle" means.

There are a ton of Dario Argento movie vets are the cast. Other then the three I already mentioned, there's also Gianfranco De Grassi (who appeared in the Argento-produced "The Church"), Enrico Maria Salerno ("Bird With the Crystal Plumage"), Giovanni Di Benedetto ("Four Flies on Grey Velvet" and others) and Dalila Di Lazzaro ("Phenomena").

My advice: Skip this trash!

Devil's Nightmare (1971)

Erika Blanc's performance almost saves this one.

[28 April 2007]

This one has a memorably tasteless opening sequence of a man stabbing a newborn baby to death but then unfortunately becomes a little too routine for its own good. Seven obnoxious tourists end up stranded at a secluded castle where they are stalked and murdered one by one by a female succubus who patterns her supernatural killing spree after the seven deadly sins. The castle is creepy. The baron therein acts weird and creepy. The maid and butler are creepy. The wallpaper is REALLY creepy. Thankfully about twenty minutes into this thing the castle doors swing open and in comes an incredible force of nature that almost makes this thing worth sitting through. Said force is an Italian actress by the name of Erika Blanc. Not only very striking in the looks department with a sexy mane of bright orange hair and some killer cheekbones, this lady also has a good deal of natural charisma and acting talent. She's not as popular as some of the other European exploitation actresses in her category, say Edwige Fenech or Laura Gemser, but unlike Ms. Fenech and Ms. Gemser, Blanc can do more than just play a naked, wide-eyed mannequin in peril. She's never afraid of throwing herself into this role, even if it means looking unattractive or unglamorous, which makes her even hotter (and more admirable) if you ask me. People have commented on her makeup being good. Perhaps, but it needs to be said that all they really did was paint her face pale gray. Whatever other makeup effects you may have thought you saw seen were courtesy of Blanc; cleverly using facial contortionism to give off the impression of something much more hideous than a simple coat of makeup.

Sadly, other than Erika and her bravo lead performance, this film just isn't very good. The castle is a nice setting and the music score is very atmospheric, but the rest is silly and irritating.

Pieces (1982)

Pathetic, cheap slasher movie.

[28 April 2007]

Anyone who rates this above a "2" needs their head examined.

Sure this piece of trash can be funny at times if you're in the mood to get cheap laughs at the expense of the dignity of the cast and crew, but did they set out to make a comedy? Nope. It's only funny because it is so badly made from start to finish with the most inept direction, writing and acting performances ever. It's lame and pointless as can be, but yes, parts are amusing in the so-bad-its-good fashion. However, if that's your idea of a 10-star movie to put alongside films like "Seven Samurai" then you have problems. Full of cheap gore, naked ladies and nasty/degrading moments (the low point being a topless girl who urinates herself right before being sawed in half), the thin story involves a chainsaw killer hacking up women on an American college campus and taking body parts from each victim home for some reason. Could it have something to do with the naked puzzle the killer seemed obsessed with as a child? The clues to the killer's identity are incredibly clumsy. The fact the opening murder sequence is set in the 1940s and the current story is set in the 1980s, your list of suspects is narrowed down to about two people. One of those is made out to be the obvious suspect (because he's a "homosexual," which they say with a hilariously foreboding tone as they're talking about Satan himself), while the other is pretty much ignored. Wonder which one is the psycho? Anyway, pathetic trash. Trashy. Some laughs, but overall a pitiful film that truly earns 1 star.

Seven Blood-Stained Orchids (1972)

Seven Blood-Stained Bowel Movements

[27 April 2007]

While those who have never seen a thriller, mystery or horror film before might find this dreck worthwhile, most others will consider it an insignificant P.O.S. And no, I don't mean a "Pretty Outstanding Shocker." What I mean is that it belongs in a toilet, where it should be immediately flushed and then spend the rest of its existence in a slow state of decomposition. This lifeless and painfully trite little turd could not possibly be more dull and clichéd. There is no energy here, no kinds of surprises or shocks and a kindergarten-level plot that fails to drum up any interest along the way. Acting is rotten also with special mention going to Antonio Sabato, who sadly has the largest role and goes through the entire movie with the same annoying, clueless looking scowl plastered across his smug face. Elfin Uschi Glass keeps her clothes on as the female lead. Too bad they didn't hire Edwige Fenech. Not because she's a great actress but because she at least always took her clothes off. Now it's time to discuss the plot. Oops my bad, there isn't one! Make sure to wipe twice after viewing this mess.

I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)

Made for one reason and one reason only.

[12 January 2007]

The first movie was an average-at-best slasher that made money because of the "Scream" hype. Producers thought they could make more moolah so they rushed a quickie sequel out to cash in. That's exactly why this pointless and very bad film saw the light of day in the first place. Nobody cared about making a quality horror film. They cared about the profit, and boy does it ever show. Jennifer Love Hewitt and Freddie Prinze, Jr. (the latter possessing the acting range of a piece of tree bark) return from the original film as Julie and Ray. Julie wins a dream Caribbean vacation and drags along a few college friends. Two of three said friends are played by annoying pop singer Brandy and former rapper Mekhi Pfifer. Here we have yet another transparent ploy to bring in more money because the actors happen to be black. Since there weren't any major black characters in the first film, the producers figured introducing more diversity to the cast would prompt even more people to blow their green on this. If only they'd put as much time and effort into the script as they did planning out how to line their pockets.

No real reason to go into plot here because there really isn't one to speak of. Someone in a fisherman outfit wants Julie dead. Did the killer from the first film survive or is it someone else wanting revenge for the death of the killer in the first film? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out since there's one particular character who's kind-of a tag along the whole time and you wonder what he's even doing there. There's nothing resembling suspense or terror that takes place in this movie, but there's a little violence taken out on a a bunch of incidental supporting actors (including cult horror star Jeffrey Combs, who is wasted) who play hotel staff. Of course these producer folks need to think ahead and spare most of teens in case they need to appear in the sequel. Thankfully this one didn't perform as well as expected, so another sequel wasn't spit out of the machine the next year. It took 8 years and the film (with the incredibly stupid title "I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer") went direct-to-video.

House on the Edge of the Park (1980)

Badly made gutter trash.

[12 January 2007]

David Hess became semi-famous in horror circles for his performance in Wes Craven's overrated 70s relic "Last House on the Left." Untalented Italian directors took notice and decided to repeat formula in several sleazy and downright inept exploitation films such as "Hitch Hike" and this musty, steaming pile of excrement. Here David gets to stretch his acting muscles (no, not really) playing an all around greasy bloke named Alex, who might as well be named Krug 2.0. Alex is having a slow night at the auto shop where he works and decides to spice up his evening by terrorizing a bunch of uptight yuppies at a remote house. He also has a semi-retarded accomplice (Giovanni Lombardo Radice aka John Morghen) who helps him out for awhile before growing a backbone. There's less violence than you might expect, but plenty of tasteless scenarios and nudity provided by sleaze regulars Annie Belle and Lorraine De Selle. The dialogue and plot are incredibly stupid, the acting is terrible and the music is ear-splitting then-trendy disco but behind all the raunch is a twist to the story. A pathetic twist only the most gullible would buy into, but a twist nonetheless.

Jeepers Creepers 2 (2003)

Series killer.

[12 January 2007]

A school bus full of football jocks and cheerleaders, bad young actors and actresses all, breaks down in the middle of nowhere. Nice time for the legendary winged Creeper creature to come flying out of the corn fields to feast on nubile young flesh. Ray Wise has a costarring role as a father out for revenge against the ghoul because it ate his son. One girl with the unlikely and extreme annoying name "Minxie" conveniently has psychic abilities that come in handy. And that's all she wrote in this lackluster fright flick which consists mostly of endless scenes of teenagers running around in fields. Just another tepid horror sequel or an ode to shirtless, sweaty high school boys? You be the judge. The special effects and production values are pretty good, but that just illustrates what a waste of money this entire production is. The acting is this bad, the dialogue is stupid, there are dozens of people running around to assure none of the characters are reasonably developed and the plot is nonexistent. There's absolutely nothing to really recommend here. Even if you're a fan of the first one (which I think is actually pretty decent for a modern horror), you'd be best off to pretend this one didn't even exist.

Evil Breed: The Legend of Samhain (2003)

Evil Breed: Where aged porn stars go to die.

[12 January 2007]

Two teachers (Bobbie Phillips and Howard Rosenstein) chaperon a school trip to Ireland so five students can study the history of Druids or some such nonsense. A forest-dwelling mutant shows up to kill them all off. The director of this cheap-looking and disposable hunk-o-junk claims the film was ruined by studio tampering, unwanted script rewrites and such, so I'm tempted to cut him a little slack because these things are known to happen. As the film now stands, it's close to being unwatchable.

Truly terrible in every regard; barely (just barely) kept afloat by ample doses of gore and T&A. The acting is some of the worst I've ever seen. Literally everyone in the cast is embarrassing. I don't think that has anything to do with tampering, just a combination of amateur actors, a director that doesn't know how to work with them and awkward dialogue that's impossible to say without coming off like a total tool. Richard Grieco, who looks like he's had either one face-lift too many or too much botox pumped into his face and is starting to look rather inhuman these days, is falsely advertised as being one of the leads when his part is minuscule. The other names in the cast you'll probably only be familiar with if you're an avid porn viewer. Jenna Jameson pops up for a couple of minutes to say a few lines and die. Ginger Lynn has more screen time and delivers one of the worst Irish accents known to man. Not that the guy cast alongside her, whose overacting is unintentionally hilarious, is any better. There are a few other adult actresses on the payroll but their screen time is even smaller than Jennas.

Even worse than the acting is the writing. The storyline is muddled as hell and incomprehensible, the editing is choppy, characters disappear right and left for no reason whatsoever and it is overloaded with annoying, childish and lame post-SCREAM hipster dialogue about how big breasted women always die in horror films and such. Even the friggin theme song at the beginning is screwed up! The vocalist actually MISPRONOUNCES the word "Samhain;" pronouncing it exactly how it's spelling instead of "Sow-en!" For the love of God, do some research people! Some of the gore effects are decent, but you have to be very forgiving of complete technical ineptitude to tolerate this mess.

Graduation Day (1981)

Absolutely hideous 80s slasher movie.

[11 January 2007]

You've got to lend it to "Graduation Day," it's a very consistent 80s slasher movie. The writing, directing, acting, editing, music and dialogue are all consistent. Consistently awful! The ugliest of early 80s fashions and hairstyles all captured by ugly photography, with weak kills, annoying characters, terrible music and a wanna be kick ass femme marine who gets to kung pow the killer at the exciting (?) climax. Honestly it's not much worse than most other slashers from the time, and at least a little more entertaining than tripe like "The New York Ripper" and "Final Exam," but it still stinks up the room. The plot's a tired: Psycho kills off members of a high school track team. It attempts to be a mystery by piling on the false alarms and silly suspects, which was the downfall of many of Italian "thrillers" from the previous decade. There's just a bit of gore and a bit of nudity here, but not enough of either to put it over. The rock group Felony show up to perform one of the worst songs I've ever heard while the dude from "Fame" gets decapitated. Dire stuff indeed but the cast might strike your fancy and includes such names as Christopher George (from another rancid horror flick called "Pieces"), Michael Pataki, Scream Queen extraordinaire Linnea Quigley and "Wheel of Fortune" hostess Vanna White, among others.

Zombie (1979)

Pretty good zombie make-up

[31 December 2006]

Stripped completely of the thought, black humor, insight and ambition that went into Romero's acclaimed classics "Night of the Living Dead" and "Dawn of the Dead," Fulci's cheap-looking cash-in goes straight for the jugular instead. Literally straight for the jugular... as a man has his throat ripped out during the opening sequence. Thankfully when the completely unappealing Tisa Farrow and a few other badly-dubbed pinheads head from New York City to a small tropical island there's gore-o-plenty for those who like schlock and blood heaved at them in equal measure. The cast is terrible, the dialogue is terrible, the characters are moronic and annoying and there's almost no plot to speak of, but there's plenty of gore and some decent-looking zombies to keep you at least partially entertained. Special mention goes to my favorite ghoul; the skeletal zombie with maggot-infested eye sockets. One big downside is an air of cynicism that hangs over the proceedings; this one was obviously made very quickly, with little thought or care, as a simple way to cash in on the European success of "Dawn" (which was titled "Zombi;" hence "Zombi 2"). Overall I'd say it's mildly more enjoyable than majority of Fulci's other endeavors (notably the abysmal "New York Ripper"), yet not quite up to a few of his others ("The Beyond," which is actually quite good).

The Case of the Scorpion's Tail (1971)

If you're not obsessed with everything giallo, don't bother!

[31 December 2006]

Step right up! Cut rate spaghetti splatter at wholesale prices! First rate? More like Z Grade. 9 out of 10? 10 out of 10?! When did we start assigning one point per plot hole on the grading scale? All you really get from this deservedly obscure little ditty is a clichéd plot, abysmal acting, tepid pacing, dreary atmospherics, poorly developed characters who do the most senseless and boneheaded things imaginable just so the movie can hop from one scene to the next, utterly contemptible dialogue, wondrous effects like a hilarious plastic model plane bursting into flames and scattered gory moments employing only the finest and brightest of "candy apple red" colored paint. So "Scorpion" is unfortunately rather pathetic and dull, just as the majority of giallos are pathetic and dull. Yet for some reason these things have a small but devoted cult following composed of people who think that if a movie was made in Italy in the 1970s that automatically makes it good. No doubt if this had been made in America or a number of other countries, these groupies would be slamming it like crazy for the very reasons I listed above. Oh well, as they often say, there's no accounting for taste.

Handsome and "smooth" as George Hilton may be, he possesses the energy and animation of a tree stump. I've never understood why he was given so many leading roles, as he comes off as incredibly pompous and makes for a stiff, unsympathetic and uninteresting protagonist (or, a-hem, surprise antagonist). Anita Strindberg shows up about midway through to play another pointless non-role and unleash her early model breast implants during the more routine passages. The rest of the cast give forgettable performances in forgettable roles. In fact the whole movie is forgettable. The plot is a tired one and involves an insurance policy being the centerpiece for a series of murders. Nothing new or interesting happens in the entire film. Martino's "All the Colors of the Dark" and "Your Vice Is a Locked Room and Only I Have the Key" are far superior to this bore-fest.

Hostel (2005)

The cheapening of horror cinema continues...

[31 December 2006]

Thank you Eli Roth for taking an intriguing premise and transforming it into something of no value whatsoever. "Hostel" tells the story of a couple of annoying yank college students and one seriously burnt out foreign "dude" traveling through Eastern Europe. Since they spend the majority of this film sucking up whatever drugs they can get their hands on, banging prostitutes and acting like complete morons, they become perfect targets for an business looking to recruit (i.e. kidnap) 'distracted' and brainless young tourists... just like them! Before you can say "good riddance" we discover that said business is actually a grimy, decaying underground labyrinth where customers from all over the globe pay big bucks for a chance to torture a mutilate a real, live human being. Sounds like a blast, doesn't it?

While Hostel might seem like a disturbing horror film in theory, it's so badly directed and written it aggressively refuses to deliver anything remotely resembling suspense, terror or shock value. The only memorable sequence happens near the end of the picture and involves a dislocated eyeball that needs snipped. In the meantime... The characters are so poorly developed, obnoxious and dumb, the dialogue is risible and the film so slow moving you might find it a trust test of patience to hang in there. I'd say Eli Roth probably had his target audience in mind when he vomited up this mess; people who are content with nothing more than T&A and blood being flung around. Sadly, those sharing his same mentality tend to be too young to actually see R-rated movies.

Most surprisingly, this mess managed to make a dent at the box office. A small dent, but a dent nonetheless. Just one more sign of the times when something this bad turns out to be one of the highest grossing horror movies of 2006. And that has nothing to do with it being a quality horror film and everything to do with hype. Hype being some major name calling dredging up Quentin Tarantino's money investment and a misleading ad campaign claiming this is the most shocking film of the past ten years. Unfortunately, it doesn't even come close and is just another waste of time and money.

The New York Ripper (1982)

Only "hardcore" horror fans need apply?

[31 December 2006]

As of this writing, "New York Ripper" has secured a rating of 6 out of 10 on IMDb, which I find amazing. It's truly a miracle considering what a poorly and cheaply slapped together mess this is, so I figured I'd do my part by casting a vote of 1 out of 10. Does it deserve a 1? Maybe. It's pretty much awful. If I were in a more generous mood, I might bump it up to 2, but it's definitely down there with the worst of the worst. The "Video Nasty" label probably helps its overall score, but that can't save it from being a monotonous bore. Leave it to a filmmaker of Fulci's dubious "talent" to make excessive nudity, graphic gore and oppressive unpleasantness seem so tedious. I really don't need to go into much detail about the plot. Standard story about a detective trying to track down a woman-hating (and duck voiced!) sex-psycho who's slashing up young ladies in the Big Apple. And yet despite such lovely acts as a broken bottle being thrust into a woman's crotch and another unfortunate getting her breast and eyeball sliced with a razor blade, it all seems so... DULL. Yes, dull. Granted I did kind of like the opening scene (a game of fetch gone terribly wrong!) but it's all downhill from there as the usual awful acting, writing, directing, etc. take their toll. But whatever...

New York Ripper pretty much only works for a certain sector of horror fans anyway; those who fancy themselves more adventurous than your average fan. You know, they who use words like "hardcore" or "extreme" to describe themselves and their (limited) taste within the genre. So basically those people who want to see a large number of women being sexually assaulted, degraded and mutilated without pesky things like plot or characterization getting in the way. But I mean, "hardcore" is a fun term to throw around, especially if you want to sound cool in spite of the fact you don't like movies that require any thinking or even the most elementary of comprehension skills to view. I can only chuckle while skimming through all these reviews about how "extreme" and "hardcore" you have to be to sit through a movie where a guy taunts cops over the telly by reciting laughably bad dialogue in a Donald Duck voice in between scenes of jabbing sharp objects into mannequin heads with wobbly glass eyeballs.

In any case, if all you want from a movie is to see a few naked girls getting slashed up real good... then have at it with New York Ripper. You might just like it. You must be "hardcore," bro! Others who aren't so "extreme" will want to go elsewhere for their kicks.

The House with Laughing Windows (1976)

Spell it out with me kids ........ o-v-e-r-r-a-t-e-d.

[31 December 2006]

In a desperate and foolish attempt to find a hidden classic amongst a crop of most average Italian thrillers commonly called giallo, fan-bots have singled out this film for acclaim. Possibly because it's so slow, methodical and lacks the overt exploitation elements of other gialli, which makes it somewhat unique as far as these films go. But the most likely cause for the praise is because it was, for a long time, one of the hardest of such films to track down. Once upon a time one giallo buff said to another "Guess what I saw? 'House With Laughing Windows!' It's the best!" and then waited for the envious look on his bud's face because he hasn't yet 'discovered' it. And thus the vicious cycle of clone admiration begins as blah movies like this one are being praised left and right by people who desperately want to fit in. When the rare film suddenly gets a wide release on DVD, as this one recently has, reality often crashes the party. I'll apologize in advance for raining on parades, but the admiration and cult appeal of this title is rapidly dwindling the more people actually see it. I rented this out to watch with three of my friends (all big horror fans) and we were all left scratching our heads about what's supposedly so great, or even good, about this sluggish bore-fest. Of course those clinging to the hope they'll be part of some exclusive group by claiming this film is some rediscovered "masterpiece" when it's clearly not, will forgive its massive flaws just to join the little club. And those more apt to independent thinking will also be around to let the rest of the world know how dull, unengaging and monotonous this is.

I still can't thoroughly pan this movie without pointing out it does have a couple of virtues. There's almost no plot to speak of and as dreary and monotonous as it is, it does at least attempt to generate some suspense. Of course it fails for the most part because it employs a deadeningly slowwwww series of anti-climatic non-events that grow extremely tiresome as the film progressed. A certain amount of mood is generated in this film and the opening sequence is kind of clever and helps generate some early tension. However this tension is completely lost in no time thanks to bad writing, awful acting, limp pacing, a thickheaded lead character you could care less about, a nondescript supporting cast/characters and a pacing so slow you can achieve the same effect by sitting at home staring at a doorknob for a few hours. And the supposedly shocking ending is complete rubbish.

Who Saw Her Die? (1972)

Did they even try??? Pathetic excuse for a film.

[30 December 2006]

Someone's lurking around Italy murdering small children. The daughter of a divorced artist (played blandly by one shot "James Bond" George Lazenby) becomes a victim. He sets out to find the killer and spends the majority of this so called thriller basically running around Venice examining a handful of horribly underdeveloped supporting characters. Clichéd writing, dull direction and unbelievably stiff acting all combine to create a monotonous viewing experience. Notable only because it is one of the few films in this genre I've seen that truly has nothing at all to offer the casual viewer. There's a total absence of thrills, scares, suspense, horror, intrigue, drama, you name it and you will find this movie lacks it. Just when you think it can't get any worse, it decides to go that extra mile with a truly pitiful resolution to the mystery that a semi-retarded 6 year old could have easily yakked up. The whole thing is pointless in the extreme and an insulting waste of time and money. If you want a quality mystery, thriller or horror film, by all mean look elsewhere!