WTF Korea?!?: Herapurple- Devil Goddess

You just know that this is bad, right?  For newer readers/the uninformed, here's a quick lesson: don't trust a movie with a flashy/silly title.  With rare exceptions, the more ridiculous the title is (Over-sexed Rug Suckers From Mars, Weasels Rip My Flesh), the worse the movie is.  In contrast, some films with really-mundane titles (Versus, Waxwork) are quite over-the-top and awesome.  It's not a 100% accurate rule, mind you, but it's a good one to consider when you rent/buy something.  I learned the hard way.  Isn't that right, Jaws in Japan?  That brings us to today's film: Herapurple- Devil Goddess.  Yeah, this one sucks.  I kind of knew it would, but I really just *had* to see it.  Damn you, me!  So what could this possibly be about?  Well, I don't want to SPOIL it just yet.  Besides, you may not keep reading when you find out what the reveal is.  The short version: a mysterious batch of murders are all connected to a woman.  Will her Psychiatrist figure out why?  Will it make any sense?  Will justice be done?  To find out, you'll just have to read on...

This film's framing device is a bit convoluted.  I'd say it's complex, but I save that description for stuff like Inception.

Basically, this guy puts his patient 'in the hypnotic state' and she starts to explain how she loses control and kills men.  This happens a lot, but only after...

 A long, drawn-out sex scene.  There are more of them than in the Pirates movie, which, you know, was actually a Porn Film (just cut down to an R-Rating.

Seriously, there are A LOT of them!

Besides the sex scenes and the bits with the Therapist, you also have the Police investigating the murders.  Gee, I wonder who did it?  Was it the lady who you just showed doing it?

The only reason for these scenes is to pad things out.  Well, that and for this guy to act creepy...

Did I mention that there were A LOT of sex scenes?  Well, there are.

There are so many, in fact, that they actually kind of/sort of make a joke about it.  The husband of our heroine is actually a Porn Director, which they use an excuse to show the scene below.  Clever?

Okay, so here's the big reveal that I've been holding out.  In a bizarre set-up, some off-screen American tells the Korean Police who the culprit is.  I'll set this caption tell you.

So yeah, that's what this movie is about.  Let's look to a man of the cloth to give some insight...

...um, thanks.  So yeah, we continue to get random sex scenes, which lead to random kill scenes and some random investigation scenes.  You have to wait a while before the things actually join up.

Oh and it's worth mentioning that one of the things that our heroine 'remembers' is a random scene featuring her Daughter (which she's not around for).  What?  Why?  Huh?

So the framing device comes full-circle as the Therapist tries to just kill the woman.  Is there no 'First do no harm' oath for this profession?

This, naturally, ends up with a sex scene and him dying with a silly look on his face.  It's less 'I'm dying' and more 'This fish smells like it spoiled.'

The woman is eventually killed, but the curse passed onto her daughter...somehow.  Given that she became a vessel for *sigh* Hera due to being raped as a girl, I'm a bit confused.

Given the film so far, I'm not going to bother trying to ask.  It does give me an idea for Spoiler Theatre though.  Hmm...The End.

Words fail me, gentlemen.  Seriously, what can I say here?  The spirit of *ugh* Hera possesses a woman in Korea to kill men who did nothing to her.  Why?  It's because she was raped when she was a teenager.  To exact her 'revenge,' the woman turns into different women (allowing for different 'Stars' in the sex scenes), makes the men have sex with her and then kills them.  Clearly the only way that you could have done it!  The whole thing is just bizarre and I honestly don't get it.  Was the film a vessel for all of the sex scenes?  Was it a horror film that could have only sold with the sex scenes?  This is especially confounding is that I don'think of Korea as a Country that makes this kind of exploitation.  Italy?  Yeah.  France?  Sure.  Spain?  Most definitely.  As a Horror Film, it fails.  It is just not a scary film.  As an Erotic Film, it fails.  The murder and sheer randomness kills any arousal (as it were).  The only way to recommend the film is as a surreal Comedy a la Troll 2.  Thankfully, I watched the film in its native language with Subtitles, since, according to the Netflix User Reviews, the film's dubbing was made by people from India.  If you want a film to show at a gathering/party that you can say 'You have not seen this movie before,' it really qualifies.  If you want a good movie, look elsewhere.  This is the only film I know of to dare to 'blame the non-victim' though...

Next up, an Indy Horror Film making all of the rounds.  Those darn Nazis are up to something freaky, so let's find out what!  Stay tuned...

Immediate Response: Machete Kills

I'm a bit late on this one, but it's still in Theaters and I damn sure wasn't going to miss it...dammit.

For a sequel to be made to a film that was made from a joke/pitch attached to a pair of films that weren't a financial success is amazing.  Let's see if this gets them a third...

The Good
* The film is pure, unadulterated ridiculous.  It's over-the-top in all of the right ways.  You can't always predict what will happen.
* All of the Stars are used quite well.  Some of them appear briefly, which makes them seem more impactful.
* The film really ups the ante from the first one with the creativity.  The CG Blood is 'flowing' and people meet some pretty ridiculous fates.  I won't SPOIL it, but some new weaponry comes into play.
* I thought it would be a lot more distracting to have Charlie Sheen (aka Carlos Estevez) here than it was.
* The film sets up the third (possible) film in a pretty big way.  That said...

The Bad
* It feels a bit underwhelming at the end, once you realize that you're not going to get full closure.
* If I'm being totally honest, the film forces call-back characters like the Twins and the Doctor from the first film.  They don't add a whole lot overall.

That's really all I've got.  The film aims for one goal: to be an entertaining and ridiculous movie.  On that note, it most certainly succeeds.  Rodriguez films often do best when they aim for one goal and one market.  It's why there are FOUR Spy Kids movies, after all, but only one Shark-Boy and Lava Girl.

In summary, if you've thought about seeing Machete Kills, but still haven't, then you need to.  Do it quickly too, as I don't know how long it's going to be around on the big screen.  It's a gory, ridiculous spectacle that definitely deserves to be seen with a raucous audience and/or one that doesn't know what they're in for.

New Goodness: Maniac (2012)

I'm still supposed to hate Remakes right?  Today's film is Maniac, which shows that Remakes can actually be good and do their own thing.  As a side note, remember that 1939's Wizard of Oz, 1956's The Ten Commandments and 1960's Spartacus are all Remakes.  The films were made to take advantage of new technology- e.c. Technicolor, Sound recording- and one was even made by the same guy who made the original.  Is the Nic Cage version of Bangkok Dangerous (by the same Director) good?  No, but it is fitting with history.  Now where was I?  Oh right- Maniac.  1980's Maniac is a masterwork film in the vein of Peeping Tom and Psycho.  What makes the film really stand out is how dark, violent and jarring the whole thing is (especially for its day).  Right when Slasher Films were starting to make it big, this one came out to shock and offend.  It certainly did that, famously-offending the late Roger Ebert.  That's part of the appeal of the film- it just goes for it.  The question is this: in a time with gorier and gorier films, can it still shock?  That's the challenge undertaken by the makers of the 2012 version, which we in America are just getting now.  The original's Director is now a Producer- possibly in name only, but I can't confirm/deny it- and the man who made P2 is the Director.  Since Joe Spinell is long gone (and missed), we have a brand new lead: Elijah Wood.  Is he up to the task?  To find out, read on...

I won't SPOIL too much here, as the film does take some derivations from the original.  As such, there are some unique things still.

For example, the film is shot almost entirely from Frank's P.O.V., even making creative use of mirrors and other reflective surfaces.

Frank is a killer, but he doesn't really want to be.  Unfortunately for everyone else, his body is not exactly compliant with his wishes.

Just to note: if you don't want to kill strangers, maybe don't go out on dates with them.

Frank Zito has all sorts of problems.  He's a rough, rough character- that's just when he's NOT killing him.

His life changes when a mysterious woman starts taking photos of his mannequins.  That's one change they made- he makes mannequins, as opposed to being a photographer-, but it doesn't really change things in any major way.

As a side note, it would have been nice to get Caroline Munro in for a Cameo or something.  C'est la vie!

As for Frank's private life, he doesn't exactly stop killing people.

I was hoping for a retread of the 'Subway Chase' kill which provided me with a Deep Blue Sea Moment.  Sadly, it is not the same.  How dare you not pander to my exact wishes, movie?!?

In a truly-inspired moment, Frank and the Photographer go on a date to see...'The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari?'  Why can't I meet (and not try to kill) a woman like this?  Chicks like seeing Goblin in Concert, right?

Anyhow, Frank's delusions take on a freaky demeanor.  If you like stuff like this, the scene is just great.

Frank has plenty of company in his Apartment, at least.  Aside from the freaky hallucinations, the smell and the flies, they seem like nice company.

Who will live and who will die?  Will Frank find true love?  Will this random guy they introduce right before the Climax have a happy ending?

Okay, that one's a gimme.  I mean, really now...

I wouldn't DARE SPOIL the ending in any major way.  I will say that they didn't make it *exactly* like the original, but kept a certain amount of its spirits.  It's how you update a film without changing too late/losing too much.  The End.

You'd have to be crazy not to like it.  First- let's get the obvious stuff out of the way.  I wish that the film was a completely unique story.  I'm still not fond of Remakes for Remake's Sake.  That said, the film works on its own while referencing some of the best moments from William Lustig's film.  They emulate the poster- Frank holding a woman's head- and other parts like that.  There's a funny bit where the date describes what she thought that Frank would look like.  Her description: that of original star Joe Spinell.  I'm sure he appreciates that, wherever he is.  There are some scenes that didn't make the cut, for better or for worse.  One of the film's most famous moments has been excised.  To be fair, the scene in the film is more of an aside than an important one, so it could be cut without losing much.  I didn't see Tom Savini's name in the Credits anywhere, but they got someone good to fill in: Greg Nicotero.  Fans of The Walking Dead should know that name quite well and he makes the gore look quite gross.  If anything, it is *too* realistic and it makes some of the gore look odd in comparison to what we usually expect.  The real star here is Elijah Wood, who balances Frank's human side and killer side.  He feels like a truly deep and fleshed out character here.  You want him to succeed in being better, while also fearing the evil he will do.  Wood played a psycho killer in Sin City, but that guy was intentionally-unemotional.  His Frank Zito is quite the opposite, making the performance feel fresh still.  If you *only* know Wood from The Lord of the Rings, be prepared for a surprise.  If you can handle the rough subject matter and gore, I highly recommend this film.  Since I ended the last review this way, it only seems fair...

Next up, a Korean film that truly embodies the 'Mondo Bizarro film.'  In other words, it's weird, confusing and disappointing in many ways.  Stay tuned...

Lost in Translation: Night of the Living Dead (Part 3)

*Full Disclosure: I'm not 100% sure whether or not this is actually for the Original or the 1990 Remake*

Now it's Japan's time to shine.  Let's see what you've got, Land of Crazy...

The Zombies are coming...and they've politely filed into this long hallway for you.  They may not have brains, but they are polite.

While this is good, I was expecting something more.  I don't know, maybe a UFO or Godzilla.  Oh well.

Japan will get a second shot next week.  I think they'll hit that one out of the park...

Zombie Crap?: The Lords of Salem

It's always fun to meet up with old enemies.  For the record, Rob Zombie has made some films that people like.  I'm not one of those people, mind you, but I know that some people do like them.  I know people that love his films House of 1,000 Corpses and the Devil's Rejects.  I even know someone who *likes* the original Halloween and how it focuses so much on Michael Meyers as 'a person.'  I have yet to meet anyone that defends Halloween II, but that's besides the point.  Certain Austrians (who shall remain nameless) feel that Mr. Zombie works best when he does original projects.  I agree.  I don't think he's actually MADE one yet though is the thing.  For me, all of Zombie's work has been 'homages' to stuff from the 1970's and very little new has been brought to the table.  That has not changed (IMHO) with his latest film: The Lords of Salem.  Rob- I can call you 'Rob' right?-, you saw Rosemary's Baby.  Most people have, in fact.  The difference is that we didn't waste over $1 Million making it again, only with Witches.  He's even dipping into his own works for this film, as Ken Foree is playing a Radio D.J. right out of the 1970s in the same way he played a similar-looking guy in Halloween (2007).  Speaking of which, why isn't this film set in the 1970's?  Everyone dresses like it is, the film's main characters are popular Radio D.J.s and modern-technology plays very little role in the story.  Instead, it's a bunch of people doing all of this 'ironically' and it just distracted me.  The film has a lot of good people in it, so I'm willing to give it some leeway.  It also STARS Sherri-Moon Zombie, so I'm going to give it quite a bit less.  To see if Zombie can outdo Paul W.S. Anderson in 'wife-worship Cinema,' read on...

The film begins with footage of a bunch of ugly, old Witches dancing around by a fire.  If you like this footage, it (and scenes like it) make up approximately 1/4 of the film.

If you don't, well, tough shit.

This is our heroine: Sherri-Moon Zombie.  She's a Radio D.J. who is the descendant of the Preacher that killed the group in the past.

This shot sums my problem with her quite well.  Pointless dreads, hipster apartment (note the Melies Moon on the wall) and her lackadaisical attitude.  She's the worst kind of heroine: a complacent one.

Speaking of problems, how about 'wish fulfillment' by way of Casting?  This guy is the film's secondary lead and he looks...exactly like Rob Zombie.  Wow.

It's one thing to rip off an iconic film, but it's another to be proven to be so lazy that you actually write yourself into your own Screenplay!

Here's the gist of what The Lords of Salem is.  First, Sherri mopes about and wanders with no direction.

Next: something weird happens (be it random ghoul walking by, evil zombie doctors or this demon guy walking a goat).

Finally, the scene ends abruptly and nothing has actually happened.

Seriously, Zombie pulls the 'something weird happened...but it didn't' card about five times in 90 minutes.  What do you think of that, Bruce Davison?

Random cameo by Michael Berryman and Sid Haig.  The same scene was shot with Richard Lynch as the Pastor, but apparently his scenes couldn't be used and were re-shot.

Listen, I like both guys, but what does this add?  They have no lines, so why bother?  Why?  At least Lynch was supposed to have lines...

As the film nears its climax, the evil forces continue to work on Sherri-Moon and her faux hipster artwork.  Her response: mope, cry and do drugs.

Who said that there were no good roles for women these days?

I won't SPOIL the Ending for anyone, but don't expect any big surprises.  You've seen this movie before.  The End.

Look, I don't hate Rob Zombie.  The guy has made some good music and I do appreciate his love for classic cinema.  That said, his love for it tends to get in the way of a lot of his other efforts.  The Haunted World of El Superbeasto was chock full of Cameos by Horror Film Characters- including having the Wedding party featuring Dr. Phibes!-, but still wasn't good.  He made a character based on the robot from The Phantom Creeps...but he's a one (bad) joke character.  Hell, even the name Doctor Satan is from an old film serial.  I could go on and on with this, but you get the idea.  If you strip away all of what he's 'paid homage to' and/or ripped off, you wouldn't have much left.  He changed the Satanic Cult into a group of Witches.  Do we give out awards for that?  I don't.  Sorry if you liked this movie, but I just feel that it's as pointless as this shot below...

Next up, a 'glossy' Remake of a film that deserves a lot more praise than it gets.  With the original Star long-dead, can Frodo fill in for him?  Stay tuned...

Conveniently-Re-Titled Cover Art: The Crying Dead

With the return of a certain show on AMC (hint: it's not Low Winter Sun), it's only fitting that Redbox (and sneaky DVD Distributors) would try to get in on the action.  

See if you can spot the influence...

Subtle.

Here's a fun-fact for anyone that may see this film can consider renting it: this is actually a 2011 film called The Whispering Dead.  I guess it couldn't sell back then, but now it might with a new name in October.

If it still can't, then it never will.

Oh, and it's a Found Footage Ghost-Hunting Movie.  My favorite.

Spoiler Theatre: A Nightmare on Elm Street, Ringu 0 and Another Film

Well, nobody has yelled at me or picketed the website, so the segment goes on.

First up, the seminal classic A Nightmare on Elm Street.  Freddy Kreuger is a burned-up, sex fiend that targets the children of those who did said 'burning up' to him.  He attacks the kids in their dreams, but seems to be beaten.

Our heroine says good-bye to her mother and prepares to leave for School when...

BAM!  Freddy attacks!  She's still in a dream and about to die.  Rough stuff.

Next up, Ringu 0.  It's a Prequel to the famous film series about the killer video tape.  With another film already out- Sadako, future review- it's interesting to look at this one.  It's all about how the girl on the tape becomes so damn evil.

In the End, she gets attacked by everyone, including her father.  As she lies in the well, she suddenly wakes up and all seems to be well.  However...

She wakes up back in the well.  She's doomed to die.  Ow.

Let's end with the third selection: The Descent.  We're going with the *actual* ending, as opposed to the hacked-up 'happy' Ending given to us Yanks.

A bunch of ladies go down in a Cave and then get stuck.  It's only when they're trapped that they realize that monsters are also down in the Cave.  The girls get picked off and one of them manages to dig her way out.  That's how the *new* version ends.  However...

She hasn't really escaped!  She's still down in the Cave and has gone insane (at least until the terrible sequel)!  Damn!

So that's the end of this Act of Spoiler Theatre.  Do you have any comments/complaints?  If you have either (or an idea for a further entry), leave a comment.

Forgotten Sequels: Prom Night IV

Prom Night is a magical night...to die!  After three years, I decided to finally do the Fourth film.  The Prom Night 'Series' is a weird one, that's for sure.  Prom Night is a well-made Halloween knock-off (that also Stars Jamie Lee Curtis).  Prom Night 2 is about a ghost of a girl from the 1950's trying to kill the children of the people that killed her.  Prom Night 3 features the return of said ghost, only now it's a Horror-Comedy and she kills Teachers to get the boy she likes.  Yeah, I should probably address that one in the future (especially since I own it now).  So, with that pedigree, what could Prom Night IV be about?  Well, it's about a killer Priest attacking kids on Prom Night.  So...yeah, they just kind of circled back.  It might be an interesting twist if they made the heroine the mother of Jamie Lee Curtis' character or if she turned out to be Mary-Lou.  Nope.  The scary thing is that this movie is most similar to a different, terrible Horror Sequel: Silent Night, Deadly Night 3.  Swap the villains out and you've pretty much got the same film.  To find out if there's any more to the film than that, read on...

A pair of teens leave the Prom to go have sex in the car.  I'm skipping about five minutes of pointless character build-up here, by the way.

Why is it pointless?  Because Father Murder (my name, not theirs...sadly) kills them.  That was...obvious.

In the aftermath, he's locked up by his Order and kept around until he can just escape.  Considering what they did with child-molesting Priests, this is pretty much par for the course.

Some vague amount of time later, a Priest is put in charge of keeping Father Murder sedated and locked up (since they don't kill him/ship him off to an Island).  Given that this is the guy's ONLY job, he fails at this and gets killed.

The rest of the film involves four of the 'teens' going off to a House to 'get busy.'  Thank God- it would have been a lot more work to show a real Prom...in Prom Night IV.

Naturally, Father Murder follows them there and...kind of meanders a bit.  I guess he has to build up his Rage Meter or something.

More likely, the film had to reach 90 minutes somehow.  *Sigh*

FINALLY he gets into action!  He attacks a Peeping Tom (who also followed them to the house, apparently.  To be 'arty' and what-not, the film cuts back and forth between a couple having sex and this guy being killed.

Oh and kudos for ripping off the Cannibal Holocaust.  It had only been ten years at this point.

The rest of the cannon fodder...I mean, cast, doesn't last a whole lot longer.  This really feels like Silent Night, Deadly Night 3 here, especially considering the same number of victims (3), the mysterious killer and a snowy environment.

You could have at least ripped off Silent Night, Deadly Night 2's 'Garbage Day' moment.  It would have helped you become more notable, at least.

Just like Silent Night, Deadly Night 3, our heroine is the lone survivor and seemingly stop the killer.  This time, it's with fire.

Of course, he does the 'I'm not really dead' reveal, which will lead to...absolutely nothing.  The End.

Seriously, you couldn't have ripped off a better Horror film?  There's a good reason that this film is pretty damn obscure.  It's got barely any identity of its own, even in the franchise.  The original Night was made in the early days of these films, so it gets some leeway in terms of not being that unique.  The other Sequels are crazy enough in their own ways to be notable.  This film was made in 1992, but feels like a barely-updated version of the original film.  It's a shame that there's not more to say about this dull, generic film.  It is so badly-paced that the pay-off is not really all that worth it.  The gore isn't bad at all.  It's not that great either though, so I can't really say 'It's worth it to wait for the good stuff.'  Even a tease of something more interesting here goes absolutely nowhere...  

Next up, a newer Horror film from Rob Zombie.  I come in with severe apathy, so let's see if he can change my mind.  Stay tuned...