Blockbuster Trash: The Planet

While I am not a big science-fiction fan (personally, horror and fantasy is more my forte), I have seen a great many of them. Hell, I've seen two French zombie films, a film about rock star zombies and the world's only film in Esperanto. What I'm saying is that I will watch anything and everything. So every once in a while, I watch a real crappy one. This is one of those times. When you rent a film that has a giant planet-shaped object crashing into another one, you don't question things. You just sit back and watch...

The Planet

Our film begins with a battle...in space. Venturing into unique territory from the get-go, I see. In all honesty, this is not a terrible scene. It is a bit misleading, given how the rest of it is on a planet and quite terrible. The biggest problem with this scene, however, is that it looks like one of those technical school ads where the guy goes 'look what I learned to do.' Actually, I think that is what happened here! Anyhow, the people are completely indistinguishable and no side is clearly good or clearly evil. Ultimately, a bunch of pods are launched onto a nearby planet and try to settle in. Of course, this is also the plot of Planet of the Dinosaurs, a slightly-better film in that it was made in the 1970s and features funny/dated mustaches. So far, this film has just given us a bunch of space marines without cool outfits that argue. Hurray? At least we don't have crappy special effects to 'look forward to.' Oh, God dammit!

*

After a long bit of build-up, a mysterious force attacks our heroes. It is a nigh-invisible humanoid that is completely invulnerable to their future (read:plastic) laser guns. Out of nowhere, one of the crew sends it reeling with...a gun from the present day. You see, the man keeps 'souvenirs' of the past with him and, of course, keeps them loaded at all times. He is rushing off to escape his death in an explosion, but he still brings along a trophy? This is not even touching upon the logical jumps involving the gun that has not been made in hundred of years working, let alone in a climate unlike it's original home. Anyhow, before I go too crazy, I'll return to the plot. The conflict, you see, comes in the form of an escaped prisoner who worships some crazy space religion. His role consists of looking weird, wandering around and, um, looking weird. He plays a part in the finale, but not in any logical way. I would explain it here...if it made any real sense. It has something to do with sacrificing himself to unleash some evil monster or something. You want more details? Watch the movie...so you can still not be sure.

*

I could go into great detail about the plot, if there was much to say. People die, since the centuries-old gun is not that reliable and the thing is still really fast. They fight over who should be in charge as well, so, yea for that. Some weird, mystical thing goes down and we get a monster...which is a troll made for the Poser program. Using it is not that bad, if it were not so badly-disguised and features so little detail. When in doubt, make the monster see-through to save some $$$. They battle it, but do you really care at this point? I don't. The End.

*

Yeah, this movie is barely worth the DVD that it was put on. The budget was something like $15,000 and it shows! I bet it cost more than that just to make all the feature-less DVDs themselves. A lot can be done with the 'mysterious planet' idea and has been to much greater effect. Maybe if I did not judge this on a professional level, it might be more forgivable. But, you know what, it is a professionally-released DVD, so it has to go by that standard. While better than any sci-fi film made and posted on YouTube by 17-year old Finnish students, it is not a good sci-fi film. You should, and do, expect better. This film is so obscure that it does not have a Wikipedia page. When nearly every contributor on ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com has one, what does that say about the film? Nothing good.

*

Up next, a Korean film that I put off for fear of spoilers. Now, I don't give a crap. You need to know about this movie's randomness and insanity. Stay tuned...

A Rare Case: 2012- Doomsday

I really hate The Asylum. Had I mentioned that yet? I know that I have, but it bears repeating. They suck- plain and simple. They are exploitative, stupid and a thorn in the side of any casual movie renter. Occasionally, however, they screw up bad and it's funny.

In anticipation of a big film's release, they put out one of their copycat films. However, the real film got delayed for a couple of reasons...which they did not know. As such, they released their film as a standalone thing. This brought us...
Yeah, that film has been delayed nearly as many times as Meg. It is supposedly coming out soon, although you can rent it's ugly cousin right now. Tough call, huh?

Next up, a DVD menu that dares to be confusing as hell! Stay tuned...

The Real Godfather?: 2001 Maniacs

Well, I'm back with another film about a bunch of idiots who end up in the hands of some crazy rednecks with murder on their minds. This time, it is a remake from 2005. Forty years seems to be the key number in how long you can wait to do new versions of Lewis films (this will make sense later). Anyhow, this film is titled like a sequel, which makes the film a bit confusing. As we- me- all know, the only way that a sequel can be done is if it is set in 2065, the next time the town rises from the midst. Come to think of it, why has nobody made this movie yet? Future people with ray guns who fly into Pleasant Valley? That is a license to print some damn money! I'm getting off-topic, so let's jump right into...

2001 Maniacs

So what has changed in this updated tale? Not a lot, actually. However, I will address some key differences.
-The victims are a mix of drunken idiots, perverts and skanks.
-Two of the heroes are black people...whose idea of foreplay is to do fake UFC fighting. Yeah, you lost me there.
-The Mayor is now played by Robert Englund, which is one good change.

*

There are some similarities however...
-One person is killed by being drawn and quartered. Except, it is the slutty girl who has to be in her underwear. Plus, they show lots of bad CG gore.
-They do the 'rock' death, only with a bell instead.
-The ending is EXACTLY the same, only it takes place after a cheesy 'transformation scene.'

*

What other deaths do we get in this movie?
-The black guy is killed by a giant cotton gin. Racist? Stupid? You decide!
-One virginal character is serviced by a skanky Southerner, only for her to sprout Jaws (the Bond villain)-like teeth, bite off his you-know-what and kill him. Just for the record, the people are all ghosts, making this completely illogical.
-Another man is tricked into drinking moonshine that is actually acid. Hey, I just did a version of that in my Fulci list! Yes, I love cheap plugs.

*

Are there any good characters in this movie?
-I liked Englund, mostly because of his accent and his flag eye-patch.
-Everyone else can just go to hell, pretty much.

*

This movie is bad for a lot of reasons. A film full of strange, unlikeable jerks can work sometimes. When you actually want us to care, however, it is a bad idea. One good thing about the original is that it was made before certain horror cliches littered the market. This one wallows it in like Louie Anderson in a pool of chocolate gravy. By the way, don't ever eat chocolate gravy. So, the choice is simple: get the old film with less gore, but less hate-worthy characters or get the new one with lots of gore and terrible people. You decide! By the way, using the same ending is pathetic. You couldn't be creative at all after giving a ghost Southerner woman metal teeth? Really?!?

*

Up next, Blockbuster Trash brings us a look at other worlds...which hate modern bullets. Stay tuned...

The Real Godfather: Two Thousand Maniacs

What can you say about Herschell Gordon-Lewis? No, seriously, I'm asking you. I mean, the man is famous for having the oldest film on the Video Nasty List from the UK (1963's Blood Freak) and sharing the nickname 'The Godfather of Gore' with Lucio Fulci. How can there be two Godfathers? Because, that's how! This is one of his most iconic films, even if it is not one of the more famously watched. It's sort of like how everyone talks about the iconic nature of Last House on the Left, but has not actually seen it (myself included). Thanks to Something Weird video (the company behind 90% of his DVD releases), we get a chance to actually see it. Is it worth the hype? Was Natalie Merchant wise to name her band as an homage to it? Find out in my review of...

Our film begins with a series of people being tricked into taking a detour from their route to Augusta, GA. A couple of yokels switch a sign out and then put it back after they have left. Why the deception? All in good time, young Padawan. When the two groups of people arrive, they are told that they are the guests of honor for a special festival. The town is just a giant pile of Southern cliches which, to be fair, are accurate in the context of the story. As an aside, this movie was filmed in my home state of Florida. Ha! We got this and Frogs. What have you got, Los Angeles?!? Anyhow, our heroes decide to stay and take part in the festivities. The men stay for the jail bait 'tail' and the women stay for...um, I'm not sure why they stay. In spite of this lack of logic (a minor one for a low-budget horror film from this day), things start to get hairy. We get a lot of banter between our heroes, but they are barely two-dimensional, so let's skip that. Our first kill comes as a man is liquored up and left behind by his friends. After they leave, he is drawn and quartered. Of course, this is 1964 and this movie has no budget, so you barely see anything. Moving on...

A short while later, one of the women is lured away by a local hunk and chopped up. Who wants Northerner Jerky? Meanwhile, our heroes wonder where the companions have gone, but really do nothing about it. One pair is taken away for two different 'games,' which are obviously what you would think. The man is placed in a barrel with nails facing inwards and rolled down a hill. He dies a bloody death, although this is still nothing compared to Hostel. The woman is strapped down to a big target and has to guess a number. Why? Because if she gets it wrong, a boulder will be dropped on her a la a really fucked-up dunk tank. Give them points for creativity, I guess. Eventually, our heroes figure out that something is up. One of them is played by William Kerwin, a regular player in Lewis' films and the announcer in all of his trailers. Through a really slow and uninspired sequence, they escape the town in a car. They rush back to the Sheriff (enjoy your second scene, guy), who drives them back to Pleasant Valley. Once they get there, they find that it is *gasp* not there. It was the site of a Northern massacre in 1865 and rises every 100 years for revenge. The End.

Yes, this is in fact 'Brigadoon.'

This movie is good, but certainly has to be viewed in a certain light. It is low-budget, has pretty lame dialogue and one note characters. In other words, it is a H.G. Lewis film. Some of the acting is good, but most of it is pretty stilted. Kerwin is alright, but never musters up much emotion in any of Lewis' films. The evil Southerners at least seem to have fun in their roles and the gore is amusing, as little as you really see by comparison to Blood Feast and Color Me Blood Red. As a side note, I hate the fact that this is always labeled as Part 2 of the 'Blood Trilogy.' Stop and think about this: Lewis made Feast, Blood Red and A Taste of Blood. So, why is this the middle part? Ahh, that feels better. Seriously though, this is a pretty fun movie.  One question though: how do they have Phones if they were invented in 1876?

I like the film, but I think that needs more hate-worthy characters and gore. Oh good, I'm in luck. Stay tuned...

Great Moments in Race Relations: Mysterious Island

It's not always easy to be a black man on film. You don't always get the best roles and, in the worst cases, you are doomed to die first. If you are lucky, you just have to be 'wacky.' Only progressive filmmakers like Peter Jackson allow you to be strong characters and die fourth instead. One little forgotten film dares to play the role exactly as it should be for the time it is set in, even though it was actually made in 1961. Yeah, it was made right before the election of Kennedy and the Voting Rights Bill was being considered. Good times, good times. Let's take a look at the politically-incorrect nature of...

Mysterious Island

This adaptation of Jules Verne's book feels pretty similar to the source material at face value, only deviating a bit at the end. This is what you need to know: a group of people rebelling against the Civil War flee in a hot air balloon. One of them is an escaped slave, although he is mostly treated as equal by the progressive people in the crew. That said...

*

The first glimpse they get of the giant animals on the island is when a giant chicken attacks them. They manage to fend it off (although the effects are sort of 'eh') and cook the beast. Nothing wrong with that on the surface, except for the scene that immediately follows it. They celebrate with a song, which causes the one black cast member to dance in a cliched manner. So, to review, the black man eats fried chicken and dances a little dance. Yeah, good times.

*

I don't think that this scene was made with malice, just carelessness. Maybe you guys should not try to be 'historically-accurate' to the pre-conceived notions of that time!

*

Up next, Sammo Hung pokes fun at black America. Should I be worried? Stay tuned...

Forgotten Sequels: The Mangler Reborn

After the debacle that was The Mangler 2, do I really need to talk about this third film? I mean, honestly, what do you expect from it? Do you think that it will be a horror classic that redefines the genre in a meaningful way? Do you have high expectations, despite this being only four years old and already forgotten by almost everyone? I should tell you that none of the stars, writers or producers are involved as well. I mean, why should I bother? On second thought, I already watched it, so you have to suffer too. This is...

Our film begins with a middle-aged man that is not in a good situation. He is spending all his time and money on a mysterious machine in the attic. His wife berates him for it, which he answers by killing her. That machine is...yeah, you already guessed what it was. After this, we get our title screen and are suddenly introduced to a completely different character. She comes home after a long day and is confronted by her boyfriend/fiance/husband (they never elaborate) ready to leave her...for some reason. They also never explain that either. So Rhett Giles ends his cameo by leaving and the woman explains over the phone how she has also lost her job. At least her dog didn't die and her pickup truck stalled. This is immediately followed by her taking a shower as her body double bares her breasts for the camera. A repair man arrives as she gets dressed (thank you, pointless cheesecake shot #2) and it is, you guessed it, the man from earlier. He suddenly attacks her with his rubber mallet, but she fights back and runs away. She escapes to her room and hides, but he catches her again. She *sigh* fights back again and runs away. Just kidnap her already! Thank you.

He brings her in the house in a burlap sack, which, of course, renders her completely powerless and mute. He locks her in a room upstairs and prepares for his actions. Meanwhile, a pair of thieves are casing the neighborhood and look at the man's house. It is a piece of crap, bu they figure that he is hiding something. One of them goes inside while the man is away seeking out another victim. Once inside, he wanders around aimlessly and discovers nothing interesting, save for a dresser drawer full of woman's wallets. Apparently, the guy never kills men, so thanks for that.  If you are a woman, well, it sucks to be you. The man wanders around some more and watches our villain drag a woman up to the machine. For some reason, he cannot just pick his way back out the door he broke in through and gets killed. Meanwhile, our heroine just mopes in her room and does nothing- thanks for coming!  Speaking of which, Reggie Bannister is also here!

This movie is so badly-paced and redundant that it is nearly Dante's 8th Level of Hell! Let's watch the man's sidekick wander around the same set! Thrill as he notices the same things! Hold your breath as he reveals that the windows have been bricked up yet again! You will pay for the whole seat, but not need any of it, since you will fall out of your chair when you pass out during your nap! Seriously, this movie is just so tedious. They establish a couple of interesting ideas- i.e. the killer as immortal due to already being dead- but just hammer them in thousands of times! Basically, another woman is kidnapped, the other guy is killed (after pausing three or four times to get hit again) & the machine gets some blood. On the subject, the machine is much smaller than in the first film and has a line of Rupe Goldbergian-style knives and hatchets on sticks. It just looks really, really stupid every time they show it. Also stupid is the scene where our heroine hides from the villain in the little pit where all the organs end up. Good plan! I won't spoil the ending, but I will tell you that it is stupid.

*

Okay, I lied. The woman and the killer both end up in the machine, but the man comes out...again. Apparently it does not want him to stay dead, but it does with her. Lame!

This movie is worse than The Mangler 2, but only slightly. The Pacing is worse and there are even less characters. We also get no Stars that are willing to do more than just walk by the set.  On the plus side, it is a proper sequel.  On the negative side, it feels exactly like a crappy Sequel to a film that was not exactly Citizen Kane to begin with!  Almost no budget, but lots of crappy gore and nearly no Plot. 'There's a guy in a house who kills people' is not enough plot for a Fulci film! Is it any wonder why this film did not make a dent in the market when it came out? I didn't think so. Now I'm done. Thank God!  It's just a shame that the Killer wasn't actually Ralphus...

Let's take a look at some classic gore films. To begin with, a town that you should never visit! Stay tuned...

Forgotten Sequels: The Mangler 2

Let's just face facts here: sequels to Tobe Hooper films are just doomed from the start. It doesn't help when the guy is not even involved in the production. For all its faults, Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 is not a terrible film, especially when compared to Leatherface: Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Part 3 or any of the other sequels. Today's film is not going to get that much of a compliment from me. Hell, I'm more likely to be nicer to Poltergeist 3 (not quite obscure enough for a review, but close) than this movie. Curious as to why? Consider that this film was made nearly six years later and with almost none of the budget or stars. I'm sorry- I was being a bit too mean. It does have Lance Henriksen in it. Of course, he clearly does not want to be in it, but too bad. Let's jump right into...

Our film begins with a Thief wandering around an office building. We get a shot of a camera about every 20 seconds here, because, as you will learn, the Director has some sort of fetish for them. The vandal gets into the main office room and *gasp* downloads a virus. This immediately sets off the Security System...somehow and the perp flees. Suddenly, their key card stops working and they get caught by the Police. The Thief is...a Girl. I thought they only knew how to cook, clean and live several years longer on average than men! She also turns out to be the Daughter of the man who owns the building and- obviously- hates him. What to do with her? Send her to prep school, of course. That bastard! We are introduced to our lead (read: only) Characters. One is a stoner idiot, the other is a jock, you have the slutty/popular girl, the weirdo (our heroine). All they're missing is the damn Principal and just giving us the damn cast of The Breakfast Club! Oh wait, we have a black guy too. We also have the Principal- played by Lance- who explains that our heroine's father has used the film to beta-test his security systems. By the way, subtle foreshadowing, movie.

To save on the budget, the film shrinks our cast into a group of five students and some random teachers. How? By 'sending all the other students away' and leaving the 5 Prefects to find out who put a prank opener on the school website. Really? That's all you've got?!? They take this very seriously and...sit around the pool and smoke pot. When will someone just kill these characters? Before the killing starts, our heroine downloads the Mangler 2.0 virus onto the school computer, since everyone assumed that she pulled the prank anyways. We also get a tedious bit where the lead girl explains her obsession with Mandelbrot sets, even showing one on her shirt. You have not lived until you have heard the word 'Mandel-boobie.' After lingering way too long on these terrible characters, the film begins to kill off the random adult teachers that are hanging around. The first is the Janitor, who is killed by a blade on a stick (no, really) being put into a room and buzzing sounds going off.  Yeah, it's Dark Harvest all over again!  The next one is the lady Teacher who decides to wash her clothes at the School whilst in her nightie! Reality is not this movie's friend! The cook also gets locked in the freezer, but survives hypothermia somehow.

Eventually, our heroes figure out what is happening after the black guy is killed by...a room full of hot water from the sprinklers.  Geez, those guys really do die easily on film!  If you wanted to watch people run around scared for several minutes on end, you are in luck!  At least the film has the decency to make one of them a skanky blond in a bikini top!  Pretty much the whole Third Act is them running around, delivering bad dialogue and reacting to shots of cameras. This movie is more obsessed with cameras than 1984 and Enemy of the State combined!  Web-cams, inside cameras and outside cameras- oh my!  My favorite part is the scene where they sneak around corners to avoid a single, rotating camera...only to discover another camera in their hiding spot, causing them to just say 'screw it' and run!  For no apparent reason, the heroine's Bodyguard (she is rich, after all) drives back to the school on the same day that he dropped her off and crashes the electric gate. Of course, the jock still dies when it turns back on...even though it is not in one piece anymore. This drives our heroine to confront Lance, who is now half-man and half-machine...on the cover of a magazine. The movie never really explains this all too well, but whatever. We finally have a less crappy monster that is not just a prop knife on a stick. At least...oh, he's dead now. That was pointless, thank you. The End.

This movie is bad. What does it have to do with the previous film about a possessed piece of manufacturing equipment? Jack shit! What does it have in common with any good movie? Well...it is shot with a camera. Lance Henriksen is not bad here, but he's not exactly given a good role. If you want to see a classically-trained actor read off a set of cue cards in his biggest scene, this is your movie! The special effects that you actually see are laughable and most of them are just camera tricks. Oh no, the lady is pulled by her hair! I wonder what is going to happen? Oh, she dies off-screen and does the Wilhelm Scream. Why do I care again? Oh right, I don't.

At least I'm done with this series. It's not like there is a third film out there. Oh shit, there is! Stay tuned...

Blockbuster Trash: retroGRADE

Dolph Lundgren is responsible for a lot of average or sub-par action films. The man has been in some good ones, even in spite of themselves (Men of War, Bridge of Dragons). Unfortunately, some of his really bad ones- i.e. Detention and Blackjack- just take up my attention too much. On the plus side, his role in the 'so macho that is about to explode' film The Expendables could help that...or just reinforce it. Today's film is one of his 'lost ones,' which basically means that nobody would buy it for distribution for about three years. Unfortunately, somebody lost a bet and now it is on DVD. So, in preparation for every action star on the planet trying to fit on one screen, let's check out...

retroGRADE

The film begins in space where a fairly-average CG meteor strikes the Earth. Apparently, some disease comes on the rocks and causes a worldwide plague. In the future, most of mankind has been wiped out and only a small group of scientists and soldiers are left. Problem #1: this virus cannot be killed by the heat of re-entry. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. So our hero (Dolph) and crew go back in time via a space ship to stop the exposure. Problem #2: Your ship has enough energy to power itself and the massive output for the most logical version of time-travel. That's questionable, but maybe explained under the 'Future Science' clause of screenplay writing. So they go back and the trip takes them, as the movie explains, five months. Really? Not only can you easily tell time in space, but also while traveling backwards through it. Future people are either really smart or lying out of their asses! Unfortunately, as their journey ends, most of the crew betrays our hero. You can actually tell which ones will by the fact that all of them are in the white-lined BMX suits. No, I'm not kidding. Dolph escapes by crashing the ship (good plan) and exiting into the Antarctic snow. Dolph Lundgren: master strategist!

*

Meanwhile, the far less interesting part of our story is taking precedence. Basically, a bunch of scientists are out in the Arctic on an ice-breaker ship. A jerk of a rich guy has them out there to collect samples from a meteor that crashed out there. Dun dun dun! There is a whole slew of these people too, although most of them are extremely forgettable. There is the idiot scientist guy who wears a snow cap with built-in dreadlocks at one point. There is the vaguely-accented lady scientist who has no personality and a mopey back-story. Our Captain is gruff and authoritative (plus played by Expendables co-star Gary Daniels). Incidentally, they hire the former kick-boxer and have him fight for like three seconds and die. Plus, you have the 'voice of authority' guy who looks like Ossie Davis' cousin. After, quite-frankly, too long of this, I am happy to see Dolph, who is shot in the neck while out in the snow. Again- good plan. He gets up, however, and takes down the two men when they approach him. He makes it a little ways further, but collapses. While out in their snowmobiles (which die or work depending on plot convenience), they find our hero and bring him in. At this point, I should mention that Dolph left the ship with all of the toxins they had to fight the disease. Apparently, they only brought one box full. Master strategist!

*

The thing to understand is that this film has a ton of plot, just none of it that interesting. While on the ice, it begins to shift at random points in the story. One of them causes the idiot scientist to stumble and press his hand down one of the rock samples they took. Despite the sample previously being in a bag, his light fall causes the rock to be smashed and get purple goop all over his hand. This turns him into a crazed, zombie-like killer. It's not so much a disease as it is a crappy 'Rage virus.' He runs around, beats up a crew member that looks like WWE star Christian, and goes to the bottom of the ship. He breaks into their 'arms stash,' which consists of several old WWII guns...so he takes a pistol- Problem #256. After a bad gun battle, he gets killed, although after Dolph fails. A bunch of ship members, meanwhile, have gone onto the future ship. All of them, save for one, get killed and our villains plan a trip. All this time, Dolph never explains himself and his motivations, despite more people getting infected. The villains arrive on the ship and start badly-choreographed gun battles with everyone. This leads to the best/worst part of the film. Our dick millionaire convinces the one helicopter pilot to take him away to 'get help.' They fly off, but are shot at by the lead villain. Despite bullets being normal for all of the film, they are now energy bolts, one of which hits the vehicle, causing it to explode instantly! Damn Pintos!

*

I have to briefly address part of the ending, although I won't spoil it completely. You can be disappointed in your own home by this movie, thank you. After blowing up the meteor- but not causing wide-spread infection- with a tiny batch of explosives, Dolph makes a trip. Back to the future, right? No. He goes back to before the ship left and convinces the lady not to go. Everyone else can go screw themselves, I guess. Also, this causes no time paradox- Problem #427. The End.

*

Even by Dolph standards, this is pretty bad. The pacing is not good, the characters are not well-written and there are about four real sets. On top of that, the film is full of way too many accents, showing that this was not exactly a film shot in Los Angeles. One of the actors even sounds like he's part German and part Australian! I have not been since confused by accent location since, well, every Lambert film in the last ten years. This plot is full of holes and makes no damn sense. The virus kills people and turns them into seemingly burn victims in the future shots. In the present, your face gets all stretched out and you go crazy. Which is it?!? The only real saving grace is the sheer ridiculous nature of the helicopter scene. Watch that a couple of times and then move on with your life. As hard as it is to write this, there are some Dolph films that you should actually watch- just not this one.

*

Next on the horizon, a sequel to a Stephen King film. I hope it's...nothing like the first one. Stay tuned...

Edit: I'm sorry about this being so late. Sunday just 'got away from me.'

Forgotten Horror Moments : Return of the Evil Dead

Armando D'Ossorio was a very underrated director in his day. The man was responsible for all four of the official Blind Dead films, including Tombs of the Blind Dead and Night of the Seagulls. Pretty much the only major complaint I can make about the films as a whole is that they are not a series. Instead, they are just four different 'happenings' of the zombie Knights Templar rising up. They are all in different locations and with different reasons for them. Once you get past this, you've got four great horror films (three, if you are in the majority of hating The Ghost Galleon for some reason). While I'm not a huge fan of the ending, the second film is probably my favorite as a whole. One moment in particular I feel is deserving of another look. So let's check out...

Return of the Evil Dead

This is what you need to know: the Knights Templar have risen from 'you graves' and have begun to kill the townspeople. They have done this because a full moon has timed up with the 500th anniversary of their blinding/execution by the townspeople. In summary, these people have terrible luck and must pay for something they did not really do.

*

All of the survivors have locked themselves up in the Mayor's mansion and are surrounded by the still forms of the Dead. These killers stand stoically until something gets their attention. This is important for later, so take notes. As our heroes talk about what to do, the devious and dickish Mayor has his own plans. He wants someone to distract the Dead so that he can get to the car that is parked out in the road in front of the house. His first plan is to get his assistant- with torch in hand- to do just that. This ends with the man getting his arm cut off (the one with the torch) and killed. His next plan- using the man's kid. I told you that he was 'dick.'

*

He tells the kid that is dad outside and wants to see him. He basically shoves the kid out there and stands in the doorway, just like he did before with the dad. The kid closes his eyes in fear and walks around, calling for his dad. Just like animals perking up when they hear prey approaching, the Dead begin to rustle and slowly approach the kid. The silence of the monsters juxtaposed with the kid's crying is amazingly effective. For those who say that zombies can't be scary simply because they are slow, I say 'watch this scene.' Before the kid is killed, our heroes manage to rush out and save him. I know that you were worried there.

*

Next on the agenda, a film about a giant lizard in New York. No, it is not Godzilla. Stay tuned...

Mask-Off: Phantom of the Paradise

To conclude this weird look at a fairly-forgotten character as a horror icon, let's look at something that is scary for all the wrong reasons. This one is brought to you by another quite famous director, but will the results be different? 

Well, the first thing to note is that this film was made in 1974, so it pre-dates the previous two films by over a decade. 

The second thing to note is that it was directed by Brian De Palma, the man behind Dressed to Kill and Sisters. There are many moments when it is definitively a De Palma film for sure! 

It is also the official debut film of Jessica Harper, who, if you are anything like me, you know as the girl from Suspiria. She is our lead in the picture and, interestingly enough, does look very similar to other mistresses of the Phantom that would come later. 

The similarities in this version are very few, so they must be mentioned. Without further build-up, I bring you...

The Phantom of the Paradise

Oddly enough, the film begins with a long musical number by a band called- seriously- The Juicy Fruits. This wannabe Sha Na Na sings for a few minutes before a random guy wanders on while the stage is being cleaned and sings. This is when one of our two villains- a dead ringer for Meatloaf- begins to seemingly talk to the audience. We learn that he actually talking to the other villain, who we do not see until later. The man on stage sings a song, making it two in the first ten minutes. This is definitely a musical! They take the guy's music and pay him nothing. Well, at least it stops there. Oh wait, they just kicked him out of their building. At least it stops...oh, they beat him up when he dresses in drag and tries to talk to the man again. At least...they beat him up, plant drugs on him and send him to jail. At...oh and they put him in a prison experiment which involves him having his teeth replaced with metal dentures. This finally causes him to snap (this man is freaking Gandhi!) and try to smash all of the Juicy Fruit (giggle) records. Incidentally, he just runs out of prison. During the attempt, he falls into a record press and is maimed. Revenge is coming...eventually.
Wandering into the studio (this man is Solid Snake!), he wanders into the prop department & gets a leather get-up and a Prince of Space- style mask. He sets a bomb in a prop car used for a dress rehearsal. After a long build-up (plus a whole scene shot in split-screen), the bomb blows up, but neither kills nor hurts anyone. 

Damn, Phantom- you suck! 

He gets spotted by the boss (played by Paul Williams) and captured. Somehow, the man is tricked into a signing a contract to finish the rest of the work that he had started on. You can't trust him- he's The Penguin! Within less than a minute, we learn that the man is going to be betrayed again when his work is done. In addition, the young lady that our Phantom is swooning is over is taken off of the lead role to be replaced by a new singer. The man's name- Beef!

 Here's some historical irony for you: the lady is replaced by an effeminate male singer. The man dresses a lot like the lead from The Rocky Horror Picture Show (it came out the next year), while our lead actress would later star in Shock Treatment, the sequel to that film!

I smell trouble brewing...Don't stop now- it only gets weirder, folks. The man is introduced to the public in a big show and backed by a band that dresses like KISS' cousins. Oh and they are the same men who also played The Juicy Fruits. 

We see in rehearsals that the show is changing drastically, even to the point where Beef is allowed to make up his own lines. When he finally finishes writing the lines in time for the show, The Phantom is walled up in his studio! He lets loose a loud scream which somehow goes through the whole building. 

One cut later and we see that he has broken loose and knocked out/killed the guards at the door. How? They never say. The power of love, I guess. 

He makes his way towards the stage as the show begins...and what a show it is! The KISS wannabes sing near the audience and fake chopping up fans! They use these 'parts' to assemble Beef, who sings a weird-ass song. 

As a bonus, their background is literally stolen from The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari! Our Phantom gets revenge by throwing a lightning bolt-shaped light at Beef, which fries him to death on stage. 

Desperate, the men send out Ms. Harper to sing the next part, which the crowd loves. They love Alice Cooper-esque shows and opera? What a crowd!
But wait, there's more! 

On the roof, Harper rejects the Phantom and runs to the villain. She indulges in rock excess and seems too far gone. We learn that they plan to kill her in the next show! Why? Because it's televised and ratings would go through the roof. Clearly this guy does not plan long-term! 

We still need one more plot twist to make this confusing and silly, so here we go. Going through film reels in the man's office, The Phantom discovers that our villain made a deal with the Devil (aka his reflection shown in a red tint) to stay young again. This explains an earlier scene where our hero tried to commit suicide, but he could not die without the villain's say-so. 

Okay, it does not really explain it all that much. So our hero rushes towards the stage to stop the sniper who is going to shoot our heroine on cue. He does so and pulls off the villain's mask, revealing- for some reason- his scarred face. 

It was not scarred before, but it now because...I got nothing. Grabbing a nearby mask with a point on it, 

The Phantom stabs the minute villain and kills both of them in the process (since the contract dies with the villain). His mask comes off and our heroine figures everything out. 

Oh and the dancing crowd figures nothing out and just keeps dancing. The End.
That was...well, odd. All of the basic ideas are there (young opera singer, Phantom, etc), but warped to a really weird degree. Our heroine is a young singer named Phoenix- SYMBOLISM!!!- who does not exactly fall in love with the Phantom. Our Phantom is a misfigured music composer who has metal teeth and talks through a voice box. Congratulations, you just made another Doctor Phibes! In this film, our Phantom is mostly a hero, although he does kill a guy just for singing his music instead of Phoenix. Oh and remember my comments about the overly-done Faust referrences in the first of three Phantom films? Well, this one ups the ante! Not only does the show do 'Faust,' but our villain makes a deal with the devil, as well as our hero and heroine (albeit by proxy)! Do you get it?!?!? As a film, it is experimental and weird to a fault. It is a cult film in all of the best and worst ways. If you ever said, 'I wish Brian De Palma did a musical with glam rock and opera,' you are in luck. If you love the famous musical by A.L.W., look elsewhere. This is just it's weird, freaky cousin that nobody likes to talk to at the receptions.
Up next, Dolph Lundgren makes a film about time-travel. Ironically enough, it was locked in a vault for nearly three years. Stay tuned...

Mask-Off: Phantom of the Opera (1998)

I must first state two things at the start of this review. First off, I really love Dario Argento's films as a whole. His flair, sense of storytelling and use of camera work is amazing. Secondly, I heard nothing but bad things about this movie before I watched it. Based on what people said, it would be worse than The Stendhaal Syndrome (the only Argento film released on DVD by Troma!) and Trauma (which I still have not seen). How could it be this bad? It's directed by 'The Maestro of Gore' and stars Julian Sands, who is a very underrated actor in genre films! Sure, it stars Asia Argento in the lead, but is this really another case of The Godfather Part III? Let's find out in my review of...

Il Fantasma dell'opera

And yes, I do think that using the Italian title makes me seem clever. Thanks for noticing.

For better or for worse, the film deviates from the source material very early on. Of course, this is still nothing when compared to the final Phantom film I have for you tomorrow. Our Phantom is an orphan left in the sewers and raised by rats. No, they don't ever explain exactly how that works. One time-jump later and we have Julian Sands lurking in the sewers. Through some exposition, we learn that it is dangerous to go down there because everyone is killed when they wander in. Why? Because rats are killed when they wander to the surface. It's just karma! Through spying, he discovers a young opera singer (Asia) and is instantly attracted. Fortunately, he is telepathic and begins to communicate with her. What? You find this to be odd? I don't know why. I should also note that this Phantom is not scarred in any physical. Emotionally- he's obviously in a bad place. The conflict comes into play when a local lord has it in for our heroine as well. Our young woman is conflicted- who can she love? Will it be the man who can give her everything or the bad guy from The Medallion? Choices, choices.

One thing that is quite noticeable is that Argento did not cast a classically-trained opera singer as the lead...well, opera singer. Of course, we all know why he cast who he did. To be fair, she does lip sync pretty convincingly. Another change is that he does not help her learn to be a better singer. Why this omission is made is completely beyond me. I have never been one to question Argento's ways. Well, okay, I do question why he casts his daughter in the lead when said role 'requires' there to be a rape scene of sorts (both in Stendhaal and this film). Then again, this is the guy who had his eldest daughter 'killed off' in the beginning of Phenomena and has 'killed' his ex-wife on at least three occasions.

The climax of the film is pretty much what you would expect, although with an interesting twist or two. The Phantom actually sends Asia and the royal off to safety as he dies in battle with the police. Why? Because he is afraid that they will kill her off now that they know she has been involved with himself. Incidentally, he actually gives up on Asia and lets her be with the other man. This is another change in the story that you just sort of have to deal with. Dramatically, the pair row off to safety as our heroine cries out in anguish. The End.

I may get some flack for this, but I did not hate this movie. Is it as good as Suspiria or Tenebre? No, not really. Is it a bit silly that Asia plays the lead role here? Maybe a little. I think Julian Sands did a really good job in his role, despite it being a departure from the usual version we get. One curious thing is that the 80s version is actually bloodier than this one. To be fair, the atmosphere and setting is much better done in this version though. It is helped by not actually being shot on a Universal sound stage or anything like that. Moments in the film have the Argento flourish, but many of them are just dirty and grimy. The film is mostly set in a sewer though. Anyone who thinks that Argento has lost his touch in the wake of this film needs to watch The Mother of Tears or Do You Like Hitchcock. Even at nearly 70, the man has still got it. Everyone just has bad times, even directors of classic films. Does Alexander ring a bell?

To finish out the trilogy, one more classically-trained director takes his shot at the tale. This one does have singing...just not the kind that you would think. Stay tuned...

A New Low: 9/11-sploitation

I have been bothered by this for a long time, but did not feel right bringing it to a public venue. The date being what it is though, it just feels right.

9/11-sploitation

This is just a terrible idea and I wish that it would go away. The basic idea is to make movies that reference the event or are inspired by the imagery of it. Yeah, we all want to relive it through cinema! There are many levels of it and different offenders that bear mentioning.

*

1. Cloverfield: While not an outright culprit, it knows just what it is doing. A mysterious event suddenly happens in NYC while everyone is caught off-guard. Everyone is running and giant dust/debris clouds litter the street. Everyone films all the destruction as well. I might forgive this movie if it did not suck.

2. W.T.C./United 93: I might get some flack for including this, but hear me out. For one thing, the first film is all about the heroic sacrifices of the men, but changes their names and turns one black man into Nicolas Cage! The latter is supposedly quite realistic based on what we know from the supposed phone calls. Oh, so you wanted it to feel gritty- thanks.

3. Reign Over Me: This weepy Adam Sandler film (how rare is that) is also not a major offender, but is pretty dumb for what it is. Adam's character is heart-broken because he lost his family in 9/11. That's very sad. Why does it have to be this event? It could not be a car accident/cancer/any other plane crash? It just feels so tacked on and stupid.

*

There are a few more minor and major offenders of this. While I will admit that most of them are not super-callous, the sheer idea of this even being thought up is bad enough. This is coming from a guy who lives in Florida and lost nobody that day. I have no real connection to the event, but can see why so many people still do. There's no need to do this, so why bother? At least District 9 is a vague allegory on the events it is based on. Just stop it.

Mondo Dictionary: The 'Evil Dead' Effect

Every once in a while, a film comes along that changes the way that films are made. Just look at the rash of Satanic films after Rosemary's Baby or the entire sub-genre of Brucesploitation. A lot of times though, the impact of these films gets forgotten as years go by. I want to change that, at least in regards to one thing:

The 'Evil Dead' Effect

Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn was a major hit on the burgeoning video market of the late 1980s and influenced a ton of films. Horror films stopped being just scary and started to be 'wacky.' Admittedly, some of this comes from the impact of Robert Englund's increasingly parody-styled performances in the Nightmare on Elm Street films. To get a real idea of this film's impact, just look at some of the movies that followed it.

*Waxwork and Waxwork II turned from fairly-scary to overtly-comedic. This is especially true in the second film, which parodied The Haunting and Aliens.

*C.H.U.D. II is a horror comedy, when the original is a fairly-serious horror film about monsters beneath the sewers. While there were jokes, it was played quite straight.

*The Return of the Living Dead films are so tongue-in-cheek that they cannot breathe. 'Nuff said.

*The Monster Squad re-unites all of Universal's monsters for the first time in over 40 years. What does it feature? Garlic bread burning Dracula and the Wolfman being kicked in the nuts. Wow.

*All of Peter Jackson's early films (Bad Taste to The Frighteners). Do I need to explain this one?

*

There are more of them out there, but this is just a sample. For future movie terms, keep reading. Up next is a term that basically 'sucker punches' subtlety. Stay tuned...

Mask-Off: Phantom of the Opera (1989)

Everybody loves the Phantom right? What do you mean that he is known mostly for that stupid musical where he is supposed to be a romantic icon? Have we forgotten his roots? He is a scary character that is most famous for his portrayal by Lon Chaney Sr! He is not some guy who looks cute and fences like Errol Flynn! Never mind the fact that he was played in the 2004 film by Gerard Butler, who later went on to play Leonidas in 300. He's still a wuss. We need to remind people that there was a big, scary villain that lived in the sewers. I have just the man for the job too: Robert f-ing Englund! Let's take a look at the '80s version of the story produced by the King of Sub-Par Cinema in his day: Menahem Golan. This is...

The Phantom of the Opera (1989)

Our story begins with a fake quote from a man's last words- good start. They give us a present day (of 20 years ago) location in what looks like Chicago or New York. Thank you, vague camera work and night shots! We meet our heroine and her friend...Molly Shannon of SNL fame?!? I guess you have to start somewhere. She has discovered a rare copy of an old sonata by the same man who they quoted earlier. While her friend is away, our friend finds a copy of his masterpiece- 'Don Juan Triumphant'- and begins to sing the words. This causes the text to turn into blood, but it only lasts for a moment and no evidence is left. Um, Big-Lipped Alligator Moment anyone? The pair go to some auditions the next day for an opera. As she sings from the piece, a sandbag swings down at her...causing the space-time continuum to crash. She wakes up in 1885 London and is greeted by her friend...who is not Molly Shannon anymore. Anyone going to ask questions here? No? Alright then.

Everyone just sort of goes along with this as our heroine is the understudy to a Diva of the highest sort. A mysterious man talks to her through her mirror, which she has no problem with. Wow, you really question nothing, do you? We get our first bit of horror as the Phantom kills the man who dropped the sandbag. Why? Didn't he set this all up for you? He brings the guy up on a rope and cuts the man open, causing him to have what I refer to as a 'kill-gasm' face. That night, he dumps the body in the star's room, who oddly comes alive. Who survives being skinned like that, only to die when a lady shows up? This fright causes the Diva to lose her voice and a new star is born. By the way, the boss is played by Bill Nighy, before he got typecast as a vampire. Our heroine does very well, although a critic the next day is extremely rude. That man runs into the Phantom and gets his head bashed into a wall. Everyone's a critic...killer, I guess. She takes the criticism badly and goes to her dad's grave...to feel better. The Phantom meets her and takes her to his lair, but not before using violin music to stop her fiancee. Huh?

The movie only gets weirder and bloodier as it goes by. The girl insists that the Phantom play his sonata from 'Don Juan' and sings along. When it ends, he asks how she knows the lyrics, to which she has no answer. Didn't you send her...I thought you...oh, screw it. He lets her go when she agrees to do the show once more. Does this actually happen in the movie though? Nope- only one opera per film. She meets up with her fiancee, but cannot see him for fear that the Phantom will kill him. Why? He's only killed one worker, three thugs and a critic already. Despite her concerns, she goes to a ball for all the people involved in the show. Oh and remember that great reveal of the Phantom's face in the Chaney version? We get that, only in a weird segment where he removes all of his make-up and features...by himself! That's not the same! He goes undercover as the villain from 'Faust' (the opera being performed), but also with a touch of Death from The Masque of Red Death. He pulls the Diva aside when she hears that the woman wants back in the show. They pull the food out and reveals the soup...which has her head in it! Still hungry? He takes the starlet back to his lair and the rat-catcher leads the police to there, with the fiancee in tow. A long battle takes place, which end with the lair set in flames and the Phantom shot several times. Movie over? No.

Not knowing when to quit, the movie has our heroine wake up. She is told that she got the part and will get to meet the backer...who is Robert Englund with no make-up. Ahh, he's still scary! He takes the woman back to his place in order to get ready for a party. He goes upstairs, while she goes through all of his stuff. We get the 'shocking' reveal that he is the Phantom still. Yeah, that makes sense. She plays a floppy disc of his which plays the same part from 'Don Juan' again. Way to make the most of this song, movie! He uses the same line from earlier, which leads her to pull of his false face! After a struggle, she stabs him and walks off with his music. Our Phantom is a wuss in the present day! She rips up his music and dumps it in the sewer, which causes him to die. It all makes sense in the story...kind of. Later still, she walks down the road and a man plays 'Music of the Night' on the violin. Do they follow up on this? No. The End.

This movie is honestly pretty good, but the wrap-around story is just so pointless. On top of that, the symbolism is really forced. Consider this: the opera is 'Faust' and, during the performance, they show us a scene where Englund's character sells his soul to the Devil...in the form of a midget. I guess it has to do with Twin Peaks' popularity at the time. On top of that, he dresses like the Satan character near the end. We get it, movie! The big thing about this movie is the gore. It is pervasive, dramatic and generally-well done. The only problem is that some of it is completely and utterly pointless. Did we need two scenes of him sewing and un-sewing his face? I didn't think so. I will say that this film is criminally ignored though. It is an 80s horror film starring Robert Englund and it is obscure? How did that happen? Give this one a rent if you love some bloody, old-school horror.

Up next, a famous horror director takes his shot at it. Will he do any better or will nepotism get in the way? Stay tuned...

Straw Deaths: Dark Harvest

Are you scared of inanimate objects? Do you find straw scary? Do you think that farms are the root of all evil? If so, you are the perfect recipient of a nearly-forgotten sub-genre of Scarecrow Horror films. This all goes back to 1987's Scarecrows, an interesting little horror gem that I reviewed back in June. I watched this movie a while ago, but put off reviewing for a simple reason: there are three of these. I felt weird only reviewing one of them, since the other two sounded utterly hideous. However, there was a brief spike in the genre with Messengers 2: The Scarecrow. While I still have not seen the sequels, I will buckle down and review...

Dark Harvest

Our story begins with a bunch of random killings on a farm. Okay, that's an interesting way to start a film. We also get the first glimpse of the film's super-low production values with the bad film stock and crappy blood work. Bad blood effects in a horror movie- oh, joy. Basically, this farmer has used his dead slaves as scarecrows, killed the guy who found out and was subsequently killed by the police. We abruptly cut to a small claims office where a young man and his girlfriend are collecting a claim from an old uncle. He inherits a farm and decides to go check it out. Dun dun dun! His girlfriend wants them to take all of his friends, but he is wary of it. Why? A pair of them are lesbians and he does not get along with them. He's not a biggot- so he claims- but he just does not particularly like one of them. Of course, they all end up going and end up in the middle of nowhere. They find the old place and it is not exactly the Hilton. Then again, it is dirty and barely suitable for human life, so maybe it's...nah, I won't go there.

*

One night goes by without a single killing. Instead, we get drunken chatter and pointless padding. It is supposed to make them fleshed out characters, but it is frankly just dull. The only upside is a scene where the lead goes to get ice and runs into a mysterious woman. She is supposed to look eerie, although a long-shot shows that her skin tone is due to make-up that stops right at her neck. Good shot, guys. He learns the next day that she was apparently a ghost or something (they never really say). Him and his black friend (not to be confused with Stephen Colbert's) go down to the lake to find...some random nudity. Yes, this abruptly you get to see the man's girlfriend and all three of the other women either topless or doing full-frontal. Why? Do you need a reason? Unfortunately, this scene ends abruptly as well and that is all we get in the nudity department. Finally, we get some killing as the scarecrows go on the attack! We get a couple of them on screen, but this movie has a love for not showing you the gore. Bastards!

*

Our heroes hide out in the house, but that proves to be barely safe as one of them get stabbed through the door. Gee, I thought that the wooden thing would stop the blade! Another girl goes down as they scramble out the door. Of course, the film does not show the blade go in or anything. Two of them get strung up in the field on the pillars that previously held the villainous monsters. Oddly, one of them is dead, but the other is left alive. She struggles to free herself, which proves to be tricky with the barbed wire around her wrists. Meanwhile, the lead girl helps the wounded black man into the barn and goes off for help. She comes back a little later to find him dead! Wow, another off-camera death- thanks. She meets up with one of the few surviving women and explains the whole thing, only to be dragged off-camera and killed. Okay, this is getting old. It's not being dramatic or clever- it's just lazy. A pair of them make it to the car and meet the woman who was strung up, but the latter dies. After killing two of the monsters, our hero gets trapped and cornered, but saved by the woman (not his lady) who sends a really fake fireball effect at the monster. The End? No, the movie actually ends with Outtakes and Bloopers that just run after the credits with no lead-in. O-kay. Now? The End.

*

This movie is just bad, plain and simple. It's production values were so low that I thought it was made in the 1990s! Apparently, it was made in 2003, despite their crappy film-stock. Do I even need to comment on the acting? The three Scarecrow killers are played by two men in bad masks and overalls. Gee, those clothes held up really well for over 40 years of non-care too. Just look at these guys in comparison to the ones from 1988's Scarecrows and you will have a good laugh. The gore is laughable and barely-displayed. On the positive side, they covered their lack of quality with photography. On the negative side, they keep killing people off-screen! I know I might be harping on this, but it is a big blight in a horror film about death and murder. Fail. What makes it even funnier is how the people behind it are adamant about their film NOT being related to Dark Harvest 2 or 3. Way to take a stand, idiots.

*

Up next, a pair of film directors try to spice up a horror classic. Just to note: these do not involve as much singing as you would expect. Stay tuned...

Great Moments in Stock Footage: Wild World of Batwoman

This little movie has mostly been forgotten, save for some mild exposure it got during one of the best shows of all time: Mystery Science Theater 3000. It is the tale of a young woman in a silly outfit who leads scantily-clad woman to battle an evil, mad scientist. The whole thing makes almost no sense and was made to cash in on the popularity of the Batman live-action show. This is the reason why it appears in this segment...

*

There is a scene towards the middle where the villain is giving one of his comrades a tour of his lair and opens a door to show some of his monsters. This immediately cuts to...stock footage from the low-rent film The Mole People. Um...they aren't in this movie. Apparently, the director got this clue as well, since the movie cuts away from them after about a minute. That was completely pointless, movie. Thanks.

*

Up next, Bruno Mattei goes to Africa by way of...Japan? Stay tuned...

Random Shout-Out!

For those not following my blogs, I was wondering why my last one- The Top 12 Weirdest Japanese Movie Monsters- suddenly shot up in hits from around 190 to 2,000! I figured it out. I got me a plug from the site!

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/podcasts/tranmission-awesome/11253-taep32

In the latest Transmission Awesome video, they plugged me as one of the Awesome Blogs of the Week! Your first real internet plug is always the one you remember. If you guys actually read my site too, let me just say 'Thanks.'

Having actually listened to it, my Blog post is plugged by both Spoony (whose videos I love) and Paw (the music critic for T.G.W.T.G.). What an honor! I don't know what to say.

Oh and I have a new one coming out today. Just so you know...

Time Hijinks: The Final Countdown

Time travel is always a double-edged sword. If you go back and change things, your own history can be re-written dramatically. At the same time, if you go back and do nothing, what the hell was the point of going back? Some films handle this balance well (the underrated film The Returner), while others mire the whole thing in the muck (the recent release retroGRADE). Where does today's film fall in there? You just have to wait and see. What you need to know is that this was a big-budget release and features many famous character actors like Kirk Douglas and Martin Sheen. This all sounds great, right? Find out the truth in my review of...

The Final Countdown

Just an FYI: the song by Europe was made in 1986 and is not featured in this movie, which was made in 1980. I know- I'm sad too.

*

In 1980, a man (Martin Sheen) is sent onto the U.S.S. Nimitz as an observer. He meets up with the Commander (Kirk Douglas) and his second-in-command (James Farentino). There is also a bit of foreshadowing with the unseen bosses of Sheen's character. That won't pay off until later, so don't worry about that. They show the man around the ship before heading out to sea. Unfortunately for them, a pretty cheesy effect appears in front of them and sucks them in. They find themselves in the past. This is determined when their military radio chatter is replaced with old WWII chatter and a Jack Benny radio show. Wow, you are a master of subtlety, movie. The Commander sends out some scout ships to find out what is going on. The men discover some genuine Japanese Zeros strafing about. The evil 'Japs' shoot up a ship featuring a United States Senator (Charles S. Durning) and his dog. They survive due to the intervention of the American ships. Does this make a time paradox? Evidently not.

*

The time manipulation keeps coming as they shoot down two Japanese planes, rescue one pilot and all of the survivors. Remember: we should not interfere. Apparently, history shows that the Senator 'disappeared' during this time period originally, so history is changed even further. Fortunately, one of the crew just happens to be a giant history nerd and have a super-comprehensive book on WWII. Of course, his book should be changing as they interact with this time period...but let's pretend that I did not say that. Our heroes realize that they have been dropped off right before the bombing of Pearl Harbor! What will they do? Do they intercede or let history be kept intact? Why stop now when you've already affected at least three incidents? Both sides argue their case, but get side-tracked when the Japanese POW tries to escape. They trick him by telling him about future events and kill him. Before this, he shot a pair of guards, which raises one question: is it still murder if you kill people before they were even born?

*

Here is the big problem with this movie: they crap out on the ending. The lead guy decides that they finally need to intercede, under the pretense that they are following FDR's orders. Yeah...that makes sense. They plan to dump the Senator off on a random island and keep him safe, but he freaks out when he learns this. In a struggle, he sets off a flare and blows up the helicopter. This fixes a time travel gap involving the man being next in line to be Vice President in place of Truman. I'm sure that this is comforting for his family, guys! Oh and one of them (Farentino) gets dumped overboard. Right before our heroes can, you know, act like the plot demands, the mysterious effect reappears and sucks them back. Thanks for copping out on the ending via a Deus Ex Machina! I was worried that something interesting might happen! They return to the present- except for those that died- and we get the big reveal on who Sheen's boss is. It's Farentino's character, who has survived this whole time and become a rich guy. So, was he the boss all along? According to most views of time travel, that is completely impossible. Maybe, I should just say this...The End.

*

This movie is good, but disappointing overall. This movie has a great promise, a great cast and good production values. The direction is solid as well, in the hands of Don Taylor. He had a mixed success with films ranging from the good (Escape from the Planet of the Apes) to the utterly awful (Damien: The Omen, Part II). The movie just refuses to delve into the potential of what they set up though, which is especially when you consider that this film is credited to four different writers. Couldn't one of you done a real neat bit or two? I may get some flack for this, considering the big, cult following that this movie has. While I consider it to be pretty obscure- much like The Black Hole- it actually has a release on Blu-Ray! Then again, they felt the need to re-release Caddyshack in high-definition too. Maybe we should save that for other movies, guys. Give this one a rent, but don't expect a big blow-out ending.

*

Up next, a film about ghost women, killer scarecrows and naked women. That's a trifecta I can live with! Stay tuned...