Carrie (1976)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Brian DePalma
Studios:  United Artists
Starring:  Sissy Spacek, Piper Laurie, Amy Irving, Betty Buckley, John Travolta, Nancy Allen; ft. P.J. Soles
Tagline:  If You've Got a Taste for Terror… Take Carrie to the Prom
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, thriller, drama, supernatural
Scare score:  C-
Rating:  A

Plot overview:  Carrie (Spacek) is a social outcast in the senior class at Bates High School.  When asked to the prom by one of the most popular boys in the grade, Carrie thinks her dreams to fit in might finally be coming true, but her mother (Laurie), an abusive religious fanatic, warns her that she will be the laughing stock of the dance.  When some of the other senior girls pull a prank on Carrie at the prom, she unleashes a wrath that, until now, she had kept hidden inside.

Carrie is easily one of my favorite horror movies.  Ask me to find something wrong with it and I wouldn't know what to tell you.  Ask me to criticize it, and aside from some questions about the (im)balance between the unique exposition and the somewhat abrupt "horror" in the film, there isn't much to pick apart.  Overall, we have a great movie with a fun soundtrack, involved character development, terrific acting, and a sensational plot that will lure in any audience member.

Let's start with music.  This movie is a blast not only because of its pop music (a jazzy mix of rock and roll, soul/pop/Motown, and disco) but also because of the lovely score.  Especially Carrie's theme is a rather beautiful flute tune that mixes beauty and tragedy into some innocent drama that provokes us to question who is good and who is evil here.

Character-wise, we have a large ensemble of big names and even bigger personalities.  First and foremost we have Sissy Spacek (who we'd see down the line in An American Haunting…woof) - a naturally beautiful (but also slightly spectral), pale, freckly girl hidden behind uncombed, waist-length hair and frumpy, modest clothes.  While she plays the cliche victim-turned-offender, Spacek plays the part with a subtle strength, modestly commanding the audience's devout attention, respect, sympathy, and fear all in a very fast 98 minutes.  Piper Laurie made her return to film here as Margaret "Momma" White, and what a comeback it was as Carrie's mother is as iconic a character in pop culture as Carrie is herself.  The God fearing, God faring, overbearing, abusive, and dangerously unstable Mrs. White enthralls and thrills us, keeping us even more on the edge of our seats each time she appears in a scene. We watch this woman's fanatic and repentant beliefs spiral out of control during the film, surprising us with new twists and turns in her mania and adding actual fright to the movie.  Even though I'd seen this movie a handful of times growing up, I was surprised later on to realize that it is, in fact, John Travolta in the role of the boozy, douchey Billy Nolan.  Not surprisingly, Billy Nolan - while more delinquent - is almost identical in character to Danny Zuko, who would be born unto the silver screen two years later.  Speaking of identical characters, my girl P.J. Soles is on the scene wearing funny red hats, obnoxiously chewing gum, and all around having one great senior year (until, you know, prom) in the role of Norma… aka the precursor to Lynda from 1978's Halloween.  They are basically the same person, except Norma has weird bangs and Lynda always says "totally" while chewing like a cow… teenagers!  Lastly, I think Miss Collins (Buckley) is such a great character.  First of all she acts like a boss while slapping around b*tchy students like the thinks-she's-hot-stuff Chris (Allen), and then she shows off her big old heart by truly investing herself in Carrie's social isolation and ostracizing.  Unfortunately, she goes and blows it (and also totally breaks character…) when she laughs during prom.

Ah, prom, a pinnacle of teenage American culture.  While we may not realize it stateside anymore, prom is truly an iconic, coming of age dance that outside cultures see in movies and TV shows and wonder about in not-so-silent awe.  Having lived abroad for a few years, I can account that young and old people alike are always curious about this "end of course dance."  I mean, I'm not from Texas, and my East Coast high school bureaucracy didn't allow for hierarchical popularity contests such as homecoming/ prom king/queen - Horror Buff is all for tradition, but my high school administration didn't want people's feelings to get hurt… that's another story for another time, and another blog - so I don't know if prom is still the highlight of a teenage girl (or boy)'s life in some rural states.  For us it was more about the following weekend in Seaside Heights (#yolo), but hey, prom is prom and at this point why not celebrate four years you think are the most important of your life until you go to college 3 months later only to realize it all meant nothing?  This movie, most likely set somewhere in the Midwest, maybe Cali (although the actors feature a range of southern/ yokel accents with some Jersey accents), captures the feeling of an American high school during our nation's bicentennial (just imagine that while Carrie was getting her revenge at prom, Dazed and Confused was taking place a few states away).  That being said, I love that movies like Carrie and Prom Night play with this cultural icon and turn it into something terrible - blasphemous, even.

*SPOILER ALERT*

This movie is filled with beautiful religious motifs that only enhance the experience of Carrie's transformation.  The first scene of the movie - which is frankly kind of shocking as we don't see that kind of nudity in modern racy films - is a foggy, dreamlike, modern teenage portrayal almost of a Birth of Venus; a high school locker room filled with beautiful, naked sirens, lost amidst their laughter, the steam from the showers, and their own blissful ignorance.  Then we have Carrie, pure and sweet under her shower until her unexpected puberty hits her and frightens her out of her wits.

Carrie's growth as a teenager with telekinesis culminates at the prom when she is taken for a victim for the last time.  Her revenge is almost poetic as she turns prom "among the stars" (Heaven) into a fiery inferno (hell).  This is the most exciting scene of the movie by far, and while it isn't particularly 'scary' compared to what we're used to, it is certainly thrilling and even frightening, especially all the cut scenes of Carrie's eyes matched with striking strings or some other shrill sound as she causes each disaster.

-Quick question: what is the fate of blondie Tommy (William Katt)?  After being knocked unconscious by the bucket (which everyone including faculty laughs at which I don't understand because come on that's pretty serious), his body is taken off the stage but then I don't think we see it again as all the kiddies run from bleachers to doors to walls trying to avoid their imminent deaths.

-Also on the topic of the prank itself: who in the world does that?  Who goes through such crazy lengths to ruin a girl's life just because a teacher gave you detention on behalf of said student?  It's gross enough that Danny and Sandy I mean Chris kill a pig to collect all that blood, but then they try and run her over in Greased Lightning?  Like okay psychopaths.

Back to religious motifs.  Carrie returns home all sulky and bloody after her *disastrous* prom only to take a bath aka baptism and possible forgiveness for her sins.  A word of advice from Horror Buff though, Carrie, you're covered in pig blood.  That merits a shower and certainly not a bath.  Oh well she just gets bloody again shortly afterwards.

Then we have Momma again, who we come to find is experiencing the tragedy of men, herself the victim of all the things she warns Carrie about: temptation, lust, pride, and boys.  I think it's interesting that we learn that Carrie is a product of a little cheeky premarital sex (which is simply against the rules), which automatically makes her, as mother says best, born of sin herself.  Perhaps Mrs. White is right when she says "the devil has come home!"

-My other favorite line here spoken by none other than Momma is "Take that dress off - we'll burn it together and pray for forgiveness!"  Can you think of a better mother-daughter bonding activity?

All of this speculating leads us to one final question: is Carrie evil or is she merely a victim of her own circumstance?  And do we the audience sympathize too much with Carrie?  I know that I for one was rooting for Carrie this entire movie because she is a sweet and innocent girl who is tortured by her classmates simply because she is different (and because her mom is literally the worst person ever).  Not only is Carrie unfairly picked on, but people like Sue (Irving) and Tommy recognize the good in her and treat her like a normal person, and that gives us in the audience more hope for her case.  Then, to top it all off, Carrie has telekinesis which is pretty much the coolest (yet hardest to spell) power ever.  Like how cool is this girl?

Or, conversely, is she evil incarnate?  I would go with the former except for when, you know, the house unexpectedly collapses.  What is that about?  We know they are living in foreclosure of some sort because of a For Sale sign we see in the first scene of the White house (lol).  I could have sworn that in my previous experience with this film I saw some sort of foreshadowing (creaky walls or floors or something), but this time around it really took me by surprise.  Is this some Deus ex machina, proving to us that Carrie was, in fact, evil?  That her mother was somehow right?  This seems like the likely answer, especially considering that in death, Mrs. White looks rather like a martyr, eerily similar in that pose as the Jesus/ St. Sebastian figurine in Carrie's closet.  We'll never look a a round butter knife the same way again.

Basically, if movies like Halloween and Friday the 13th are criticized because they allowed audiences to sympathize with the murderer, I would say in your unhappy bickering, don't forget to add Carrie to the top of the list.

-Final thoughts, imagine if you were Sue Snell and (a) your name was actually Sue Snell and (b) your entire graduating class died at prom.  Just imagine those two things together.

-Fun fact: this was the first screen adaptation of a Stephen King work.

Final critique:  This is an excellently crafted, spooky, and haunting horror movie of the highest caliber.  I would highly recommend this movie for all audiences except for people that don't like blood (I went to high school with a girl who fainted at any sight of blood and one of my closest friends really likes pigs so she probably wouldn't be too happy with Travolta here).  While the movie isn't overly scary, it is both exciting and interesting; the 98 minutes fly by, culminating in an unforgettable prom sequence and a "shock ending" that I'm sure thrilled people at the time but now seems rather passé.  Anyway - go watch Carrie, and enjoy a shining example of the horror genre.

Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood (1988)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  John Carl Buechler
Studios:  Paramount Pictures
Starring:  Lar Park-Lincoln, Kevin Spirtas, Terry Kiser, Susan Blu, Kane Hodder
Tagline:  Jason is back, but this time someone's waiting!
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, slasher, stalker, serial killer, psychopath, masked murderer, teen
Scare score:  D/ D+
Rating:  B-

Plot overview:  Sometime after the events of the previous film, Tina Shepard (Park-Lincoln) returns with her mother (Blu) and Dr. Crews (Kiser) to Camp Crystal Lake, where her father died ten years earlier.  Still blaming herself for her father's death, Tina is haunted by bad memories while the conceited Dr. Crews attempts to exploit her peaking emotions to study signs of telekinesis.  On top of the pressure from her doctor, Tina is half befriended and half mocked by the rowdy group of teenagers staying next door.  Not to mention, a strange masked figure has risen from the lake.

Let me start by pointing out that the Friday the 13th movies really do believe in girl power.  Just look at the movie poster here.  Not that Jason ever, ever discriminates when it comes to choosing his victims, which are many (I recently saw a chart of body counts in horror franchises and our boy Jason is #1) - but still, horror movies are generally very giving when it comes to the 'final girl.'  Friday the 13th Part VII throws us a huge curve when we are introduced to Tina Shepard, aka the second coming of Carrie, only with a cool, '80s flare and a loving mother.  Speaking of which, special shout out to the mysterious Susan Blu for portraying such a cool (although somewhat clueless) mom.  Seriously about girl power though: Spousal abuse?  BAM Tina kills dad.  Creepy therapist trying to exploit your psychic powers?  BAM shut him down and run him out of the house.  Jerky girls next door picking on you for being a basket case (we've seen similar concepts with Tommy Jarvis)?  BAM Jason gets them anyway.  Tina is absolutely a rival for Jason; he seems afraid of her, aware of her more so than he is of anyone else.  One even wonders if she's too strong for Jason.

Actually it's interesting that this is the second main character we've had after Tommy Jarvis to have dealt with mental health issues.  Both Tina and Tommy had traumatic experiences as children (as Jason himself must have), and then later in their teenage/ young adult life, society continues to mock them for it, as seen specifically by queen bee Melissa (Susan Jennifer Sullivan) in this installment.  Not only does this affect both protagonists in terms of dealing with a 'boy who cried wolf'-type scenario, but they themselves have to question their own sanity and ability.

Concerning Tina's knack for telekinesis, this whole plot choice leads to a supernaturally gifted protagonist to combat what is now a 100% supernatural antagonist.  In earlier films, Jason/ his mother are (more or less) human.  It isn't until Part VI that Jason is sort of, you know, brought back from the dead, so it's no great mystery that in this film he is all-out zombie.  This becomes especially apparent later in the movie.  Watch it and you'll know what I mean.

I generally enjoyed this movie and was really torn about the score.  I almost went lower until I remembered that while watching it, I was fairly entertained and enjoyed the new teenage bait, the creative kills (I LOVED the sleeping bag/ tree one), and the never-ending body count.  As far as Friday the 13th movies go, I did feel that this one followed the normal recipe, but the psychic powers of our leading lady of course change things.

Acting is very mixed all across the charts.  Most people play up their roles too dramatically in a largely '80s fashion, but considering the ironically light-hearted feeling of the movie, it's not a big deal.  This is the first of four Friday the 13th movies to take on the talented Kane Hodder in the role of Jason.  Mr. Hodder is in the middle of a lengthy and accomplished career of acting and stunt work; some of his credits include Wishmaster, Se7en, and even Waxwork in the same year as this installment.

*SPOILER ALERT*

Speaking of Jason, I think the single most surprising event of this movie was when our killer is unmasked.  What in the world was that creature beneath?  Who knew that coming back from the dead (perhaps two or three times) and spending some time underwater could result in you looking like that?  Perhaps more creative than frightening, I suppose we can attribute this work to director John Carl Buechler who has led a well-known career in the realm of special effects and makeup.

Final critique:  Within the world of Friday the 13th, Part VII: The New Blood manages to surprise us with some new and crazy ideas, while still remaining true to the feeling of the franchise (naughty teens = fresh meat, things popping out of the lake when we least (most) expect it... etc).  I certainly enjoyed the film, but that comes by taking it with a grain of salt and kind of expecting what you're going to get from virtually almost any other film in the series.  If you're looking to start getting into the world of Jason and Camp Crystal Lake, start at the very beginning and work your way through.  If you ignore my advice and go with lucky number seven anyway, prepare yourself for an eerily campy world of '80s teenagers, parties, and of course the dark shadow lurking outside the cabin.

Ouija (2014)

(Preliminary note: during the previews, I saw an extended trailer for Insidious: Chapter 3, set to release in 2015. It looked pretty fun.)

GENERAL INFO:
Director: Stiles White
Studios: Universal Pictures
Starring: Olivia Cooke, Daren Kagasoff, Ana Coto, Shelley Hennig, Douglas Smith, Bianca A. Santos; ft. Lin Shaye
Tagline: Keep Telling Yourself It's Just A Game.
MPAA Rating: PG-13
Genre: horror, terror, supernatural thriller, ouija board, haunting, ghost
Scare score: B
Rating: A-

Plot overview: Following the apparent suicide of her best friend Debbie (Hennig), college student Laine (Cooke) is left with questions she thinks only a mysterious ouija board found in Debbie's attic can answer. Once she and her friends make a connection through the board, however, they realize that the game isn't so easy to end.

*Quick funny story: During a fairly scary moment of this movie, the screen at the movie theater I was at went totally dark, leaving myself and the only other two people in the theater in the pitch black beneath the sounds of screaming coming from the scene. Talk about freaky.

Following a few years of development, Ouija finally debuted just in time for the Halloween season. I went to see it tonight, and while the critics might be saying otherwise, I found it to be very enjoyable. Like most horror movies these days, Ouija relies heavily on the well-timed, dumb scares that are sure to make eager teenagers scream with delight while veteran horror-goers frown in their cynicism. I found that if I lighten up and allow myself to enjoy it, it makes the whole experience better. In doing so, you'll find a lot of reasons to walk out of Ouija with a smile on your face.

This isn't the first movie we've seen involving a ouija board (think The Exorcist, or Witchboard and the sequels it spawned). One thing I can appreciate is a horror movie that cleverly creates merchandise to go along with it (like masks or costumes). Creating a fictional horror and then manifesting said horror into something tangible—and sellable—really helps bring that horror to life. A good example would be Friday the 13th or Halloween with the old school hockey or Captain Kirk/Michael Myers masks, respectively. In this case, the inverse is true, and Hollywood has taken a century-old toy (conveniently owned by Hasbro today) and decided to revolve the horror around it.

The babysitter I went to as a kid had an old ouija board buried among the stacks of old games in the playroom, and as very small children, we tried our hands at it more than once. Someone always cheated, but it was fun to pretend that we were making some sort of contact with **the beyond**. We never did, but after seeing this movie, maybe that was for the better.

Ouija is no different than most horror movies we see these days. But the important thing to remember is that that is not a bad thing. Across all genres of film and literature, plots have held countless parallelisms since mankind first started telling stories. Most stories share similar characters and teach the same lessons. With Hollywood pounding out movie after movie after movie and with TV going through a golden age, what's important in film today are the nuances that differentiate one movie from another.

Sure, Ouija presents us with another group of good looking, "college-aged" kids (even misfit kid sister Sarah (Coto) is always perfectly coiffed) who meddle into something bigger and badder than them, and it's only a matter of time until they get knocked off one by one. Okay, so we've seen it. So what? Horror films are becoming less and less about the what, but instead about the when and how. How is this board game going to kill these 20-somethings and when? For better or for worse, creative deaths are what keep so many horror films going these days.

It's for this very reason that I am a staunch supporter of predictable and corny scares. We all live for those *boom* moments that turn out to be nothing. Ouija is filed with them. Chock-full. I don't care if these are "cheap scares" or not— at the end of the day, a scare is a scare, and not every film is going to be a new masterpiece anyway. More power to the movie that can create new, truly terrifying scares (there's plenty of them all the time, and plenty more to be done), but if audiences are going to see horror movies to get some kicks, then I think there should be plenty of "cheap scares" that will at least ensure these people have a good time.

While Ouija perhaps does the boyfriend-lurking-around-the-corner-whoops-didn't-think-it-would-scare-you-sorry-babe-lol one too many times, all of these small scares are fine details that maintain a sense of thrill and terror throughout the film. Ouija not only gives us these, but it gives us plenty of teases, too. From pretty early on, there is some major foreshadowing that might get us anxious in the moment, but ultimately ruins the surprise.

Okay, so I've defended the heavy usage of flashlights rolling off and illuminating things we'd rather not see, or creepy reflections or shadows cast against the wall— so what else is there to this film?

I mean, the plot is fun. We have a pretty decent mystery here with an expected, whoops I mean unexpected twist that keeps the evil board in our lives just so much longer. While I wasn't surprised by some red herrings in the plot, I thought it was really fun, and who doesn't love a fun appearance by Lin Shaye (Insidious, Insidious: Chapter 2)?

If you were to ask me about acting in this film, I would probably smile and shrug. It's exactly what you expect. I like Olivia Cooke in Bates Motel, and I liked her in this. She has a certain collected coolness about her —along with an undeniable macabre—that I think will keep her popular in horror as time goes on. Our other characters were fine, paper thin, and trying desperately hard to be realistic. Hey, Hollywood— you want realistic? Try casting less hot people all the time. In a horror movie, girls' hair should not always be perfect. People should not always be beautiful and muscular and perfectly dressed. This needs to stop. We want more realistic films and we want them now!

There is legitimately zero diversity in this film. Aside from a weak attempt of the casting of Vivis Colombetti in the role of "Nana," thus leading us to believe that Laine and Sarah are perhaps Latina, there is just nothing. Even Bianca A. Santos as capricious friend Isabelle seems pretty whitewashed. I don't know what's worse: Forcing one unimportant minority friend into a white-horror plot, or just leaving them out completely. Do better, casting team. Not too great for 2014.

The settings, however, were very cool. While the scariest thing about Debbie's house is the overpowering wallpaper that changes in every room, I thought it was an equally pretty and eerie home in which this movie could take place. But I digress.

Somewhat surprisingly (?) this movie ends up being largely about sisterhood and the bond shared between females. We've been seeing a lot of this lately, and the more I see it, the more important I think it is. Females in horror have long been pretty limited to their roles. On one hand, we've always had the scream queen star or kickass final girl. On the other hand—and perhaps the dominant one that most people focus on—we have the sexploited, dumber girl that gets murdered while in a bra and panties (or less). And more often than not, even the nerdy girls are usually very attractive underneath their deceptive outfits or bad glasses, and they get exploited as well. Lately, however, horror movies have started focusing on female characters in the roles of mothers, sisters, and daughters, stressing the importance that family has in overcoming horrifying or even supernatural circumstances. I'm talking about taking a step further than letting a teenage girl fight back against her victimization (Halloween, Friday the 13th, or A Nightmare on Elm Street) and entering the realm of Ripley, or Clarice Starling, or especially a character like Carrie White who takes the horror into her own hands. Why is it that horror movies, perhaps even more so than any other genre, are constantly coming out with new blockbusters with a woman in the lead role(s)? Sure, there's a sense of empowerment behind it, but I honestly think it makes the story more relatable to the audience. We can sympathize more easily with female characters because often they are acting out of love, especially when playing familial roles. It is this love, furthermore, that usually combats the evil at hand most efficiently. Let me work more on my feminist theories. In the meantime, let me say that what we need more of is female antagonists. Bring 'em on!

Ouija's other strengths lie in the beautiful cinematography by David Emmerichs and what I thought was a quaintly powerful score by Anton Sanko. Even if the acting is only so-so, at least we get to see and hear some pretty—and creepy—stuff.

My biggest problem with this movie is that everybody and their (grand)mother knew the word "planchette," referring to the sort of iron-shaped, mystic tool that moves on the ouija board. I understand that this is what the ouija accessory is called in real life, but why in the world would every character in the movie know that, too? Have you ever heard someone use that term in casual conversation? When we first hear 8-year-old Debbie (Claire Beale) so keenly pronounce the word "plan-chette" my skin crawled. We heard it at least four of five more times in the movie, and each time I wanted to throw my small popcorn at the screen. I speak Spanish, I know "plancha" for iron, I get that we use a lot of French in English— but planchette?? Spare me. This is a smaller detail within a larger problem— the script. For once in my life, I just wish horror movie writers would run the script by a group of 20-somethings to approve of the script before filming. (And maybe, just maybe that 20-something could be me). More than a few lines and scenes of this movie cause a younger audience to raise an eyebrow. It's a fine line between saying "my folks will be home any minute" and saying "hey you wanna' come over for a game night? hashtag ouija hashtag planchette." At least these characters seemed modern; I thought the heavy use of Macs and iPhones—especially the flashlight—was very good and relatable.

Final critique: Don't let the critics dissuade you from seeing Ouija. Or, if you feel like waiting, definitely rent this movie once it comes out, and have yourself a merry little scary movie night at home with friends— I know I will. This movie is filled with plenty of *boom* moments and playful "cheap" scares that will make it worthwhile for the thrill seekers amongst you, but even the scariest moments shouldn't be too much for the scaredy cats out there. If anything lasting will haunt you after this movie, it'll probably be that you'll never want to floss ever again. Not that you do already. Besides, if Ouija proves to be too scary for you, just remind yourself it's only a game. Or is it?

The House at the End of the Street (2012)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Mark Tonderai
Studios:  FilmNation Entertainment
Starring:  Jennifer Lawrence, Max Thieriot, Elisabeth Shue
Tagline:  Fear Reaches Out... For the Girl Next Door
MPAA Rating:  PG-13
Genre:  horror, thriller, drama, mystery, suspense, psychological thriller, surprise ending
Scare score:  C-
Rating:  B

Plot overview:  Nonconformist teen Elissa Cassidy (Lawrence) and her young, single mother Sarah (Shue) finally leave the city and find a nice, inexpensive home of their own in a peaceful albeit isolated area of a wealthy town.  There's just one catch: the house next door was the scene of a double patricide committed several years ago by the mentally disturbed daughter Carrie Anne Jacobson.  While the girl is now believed to be dead, her body was never found after that night.  The only resident in the murder house is her brother, the reclusive Ryan (Thieriot) who gains Elissa's trust as they start seeing each other.  Despite the judgements of Sarah and the snobby townies, Ryan has the support of police officer Bill Weaver (Gil Bellows) as he still deals with the loss of his entire family.  And although everything in her new town starts off well, Elissa will soon discover what is hidden in the house at the end of the street.

From the start of the film, we are dealing with a rough and tough mother/ daughter duo, both of whom are strong and even angry, yet sensitive with a knack for music and even a need to be loved by men who seem so absent from their present lives.  Long story short, there is a certain girl power feeling behind this whole film although for me that was a completely neutral point.  While I wouldn't consider Lawrence's performance anything remarkable (or these days, Oscar worthy), there is something so natural about her that I couldn't help but feel drawn in to her story from the very beginning.  The cinematography of this film reminded me a bit of The Hunger Games or even Twilight which is embarrassing but true- there was a certain omnipotent darkness, like a dark grey cloud just beyond the strikingly green forest that most of the movie takes place in and around.  From what I've gathered, this is right up the angsty-but-beautiful Lawrence's alley.  A self-described "girl-who-feels-the-need-to-fix-everybody's-problems," the smart, attractive, caring, damaged-yet-strong, and 'always-let-your-conscience-be-your-guide' Elissa falls quickly for the mysterious, damaged-and-showing-it Ryan Jacobson, portrayed by a dark and difficult to penetrate Max Thieriot.  He does a decent job acting, and I guess what I most appreciated was that he was able to really keep the mystery going the entire film, tricking us into not trusting him, only to later trick us into caring for him, and perhaps later tricking us yet again...

Back to the girl power bit again, Elissa's character was clearly a male-made fantasy of the last girl archetype, and yet somehow there is a very real faction of her character, such that anyone might think they went to high school with this girl - while at the same time I'm pulling my hair and calling out the spade that people like this don't really exist.  On a positive note, I enjoyed her guitar playing and singing.  There is an excellent commentary made on family in this movie - largely focusing on Elissa and Sarah (the lush) but later also including Ryan and his lack of family.  Where is the perfect, nuclear family in this film?  It doesn't exist, save for stuck-up schoolmate Tyler's (Nolan Gerard Funk) seemingly perfect family - who in reality are ignorant of their son's poor behavior outside of the classroom and family functions.  The idea of family is closely related to the concept and motif of the home, which in part is contrasted from being enclosed inside a home and then loose outside in the woods.  So many themes!  No surprise that Elissa's rockstar dad (Sarah's ex-hubby) is out of the picture though still important to both women.  I think it would be easy to conclude that their acquiring a nice house on their limited budget is a move for settling-down- but what could settle the free spirit of these two women - I could go on and on. 

That is not to say that I didn't enjoy either Shue's or Lawrence's performances, but I couldn't help but feel like I had seen this all before.  Not to mention all the familiar faces in this movie, with Lawrence now being a household name, Bellows having been the memorable young and unfortunately overly-informed inmate from Shawshank (one of my top favorites), and then I didn't realize until after the fact that I saw Nolan Gerard Funk star in the title role of Bye Bye Birdie on Broadway a few years back.  I love when horror movies have a bunch of big (or medium) names scattered about the cast.  Hollay-wooood.

Aside from small errors and other pet-peevy problems- I did enjoy this film.  It was one of many movies I got to watch during a long, sleep, transatlantic flight (imagine me taking notes on the film in a small notebook during the flight), and I have to say it was pleasant for the trip.  The soundtrack stood out to me although I didn't write down why so I can't tell you now.  The best part of the movie is all the plot twists which just border on absurd without crossing that line, leaving us in a certain mindwarp of "oh no s/he didn't!"s.  In some moments I just didn't know who to trust anymore.  That always boosts up a horror movie quite a bit, both adding some excitement and in this case even depth to the plot and its characters.

Final critique:  This is a pretty easy-to-watch, gateway horror movie.  By that I mean anybody could watch this, during the day or late at night, without being too scared.  We have our basic mystery, plenty of slow-building suspense, and then even a bit of action, but more than anything else this is a story about teenagers, families, and trust.  Maybe it drags on a bit longer than it needs to, but hey, I think this film might find its way into a nice go-to scary movie for younger audiences at sleepovers.  Recommended for anybody looking for a relaxing but not entirely boring horror flick.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Jack Sholder
Studios:  Heron Communications, Smart Egg Pictures, New Line Cinema
Starring:  Mark Patton, Kim Myers, Robert Rusler, Robert Englund
Tagline:  The Man of Your Dreams is Back.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, slasher, teen
Scare score:  C+
Rating:  A-/B+

Plot overview:  A few years after the events of the first film, a new family has moved into 1428 Elm Street, and the teenage son Jesse (Patton) is already having terrifyingly realistic nightmares.  These nightmares largely revolve around a terribly scarred murderer, Fred Krueger (Englund).  This time around, he doesn't just want to kill teenagers, he wants to use Jesse's body to do so.  Worried that he is losing his mind, Jesse depends on the support of his [it's complicated with] girlfriend Lisa (Myers) and new friend Ron Grady (Rusler).  Will the help of his friends and family be enough to combat Freddy from taking over his mind and body?

The saga continues with this sequel, released only a year after the original movie (love a good horror franchise).  One of the best things this movie does, quite unlike other franchises at the time, is (almost) totally switch up the plot.  If this were your standard horror sequel, Freddy would merely be haunting Jesse in the same way that he haunted Nancy in the last film, simultaneously moving on to his friends.  This clever sequel, however, turns the protagonist's battle with Krueger into something not only mental but also physical, a haunting equally as diurnal as nocturnal.  Perhaps the greatest change we are given here is the fact that the protagonist and main victim of the horror is a teenage boy and not a girl.

While this isn't completely groundbreaking (in The Evil Dead our main protagonist is a college-aged male), it is certainly different than our typical damsel in distress in the horror genre.  Furthermore, unlike films such as The Evil Dead where the male protagonist largely fights against the given terrors, in this Elm Street installment, our protagonist is much more of a victim than he is a hero.  In fact, his debated saving comes at the hands of a girl.

Is that what's groundbreaking about this movie?  A debatably homosexual protagonist in a mainstream horror movie?  Truth be told, Horror Buff doesn't buy that theory.  If you watch this movie convinced that Jesse is straight, it still makes complete sense.  The boy is going crazy (like the last movie, we may very well debate that the horror sequences only take place in a fantasy world created by Jesse).  While Jesse's sexuality may or may not be in question, one thing that's certain is that he doesn't fulfill every standard male/ macho stereotype usually attributed to masculine characters such as Ash in The Evil Dead.  We see Jesse nervous from nightmares and social pressure, we see Jesse dancing (including some butt gyrating) while cleaning his bedroom, we hear Jesse's ear-piercing screams - true screams, not yells - several times throughout the movie.  Jesse is sexualized, often shown in his underwear, and at one point almost made to be the victim of sexual assault.  Forget final girls and forget jock boys that get killed off oh-so-close to the finale: here we have a masculine boy victim.

What's good about this movie?  As mentioned, the total change in plot is refreshing.  It also adds a level of psychological depth to the film as the main character has to truly debate whether or not he is going insane.  While there is plenty of time dedicated to plot development, when the scares come they're certainly fun, providing small thrills here and there.

*SPOILER ALERT*

The best scene of the movie, or at least one of them, has to be the pool party at Lisa's house.  When Freddy breaks loose here, he shows no mercy, and a TBP or teen booze party turns into an absolute bloodbath.  Seriously though, this scene is great.  I love when chaos breaks loose.  It's reminiscent of Carrie and the final prom scene, except with a creepy pedophile slashing students while fire seems to burst forth from everything.  Then, towards the end of the film we have a pretty gross burn sequence which alludes to Freddy's human demise and perhaps Jesse's mortal end.  This features some disturbing makeup and another Jesse being sort of born forth from the ashes aka burnt, charred skin.

Another favorite scene?  Shortly before Grady's death, we see Freddy literally bursting forth from Jesse's body.  I love the special effects here: a disturbing, Alien-esque birth of evil from a human character.  Gross and so smart.

The worst scene?  This probably has to be when the family bird goes crazy, kills it's companion, and then we literally have an unnecessarily extensive scene that can at best make us think of The Birds and at worst make us want to stop watching.

While our main characters all deliver some good or decent acting, my favorite has to be Kim Myers in the role of Lisa.  Does she not look exactly like Meryl Streep?  Also her acting is a breath of fresh air.

Final critique:  I'm keeping this review short because I watched this movie over a week ago and have sort of forgotten about other major points that I think I might have wanted to have touched upon.  Regardless, this is a truly well-done sequel, and while its scares don't necessarily surpass those of the first movie, the new cast and new plot keeps this franchise upbeat and interesting.  Stayed tuned as I review more Nightmare on Elm Street-s to see whether Freddy sinks or swims.

The Faculty (1998)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Robert Rodriguez
Studios:  Los Hooligans Productions, Dimension Films
Starring:  (*takes a deep breath*) Elijah Wood, Josh Hartnett, Clea DuVall, Jordana Brewster, Laura Harris, Shawn Hatosy, Robert Patrick; ft. Bebe Neuwirth, Piper Laurie, Famke Janssen, Salma Hayek, Jon Stewart, Usher Raymond, Christopher McDonald
Tagline:  And You Thought YOUR Teachers Were Weird...
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, science fiction, mystery, aliens, teen
Scare score:  C/C+
Rating:  B/B+

Plot overview:  In the small town of Herrington, Ohio, things seem pretty boring and normal until a group of teenagers from the high school begin to suspect that something very weird is going on with the teachers.

This movie is wild.  Not necessarily because of the action and plot (which aren't bad), but mainly due to how damn star-studded this silly teen scary scifi flick is.  This is one of those films, along with Darkness Falls, that I used to watch all the time with some of my friends growing up.  I don't think any of us realized then just how many stars from now and then there are in this movie; it's absolutely wild.

As our starring gang, we have Josh Hartnett (same year as Halloween: H20) as the brainy but unmotivated Zeke, Elijah Wood as the nerdy and bullied Casey, and familiar face Clea DuVall (American Horror Story: Asylum, The Grudge) as goth outcast Stokes.  Then, as our leading adults that are sure to make any teen wary of growing up, there's a few very familiar names, but the biggest have to be Piper Laurie (Carrie) and Salma Hayek - who are both in surprisingly small roles - as well as Jon Stewart and the guy who's been in everything (but most importantly Grease 2), Christopher McDonald.  There are plenty of other familiar faces in this movie, such as Usher (*yeah*) - which, at the end of the day and 16 years removed - makes for an awesome watch.

Given this crazy cast, the acting is all pretty much what you'd expect from a '90s teen horror/scifi/mystery, which is to say... okay.  The screenplay is by Kevin Williamson (Scream, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Halloween: H20, current series Stalker which has been fun so far), so there's plenty of corny but intriguing teen-ness to the whole project.  What's not to love?

In general, this movie isn't too scary, but there are certainly scares and thrills (more thrills than scares) and, more often than not, jumpy moments and some mild gore that makes us shudder.  The mystery itself, plus all the paranoia (think of this as a teenage, '90s version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers meets Slither) is really what drives the film.  It's very fun trying to guess who has been taken over by aliens and who is innocent.  Again, regarding horror, there are some fun scares, like the type that make you want to watch this movie with friends and popcorn in the dark or during an innocent Halloween marathon.  There's nothing too dark here, but rather a more ominous horror that the movie makes obvious.  If aliens were going to come invade America, why not use the back door? (Which is apparently Ohio).

Final critique:  This is a fun movie.  The plot is enjoyable, the terror is mysterious and occasionally gives a small thrill, and most of the time you're just entertained by the cameos.  There isn't too much real horror in this film, but there is some gore and a few scary moments, plus a pretty impressive antagonist.  All in all, this is an easy watch that I would recommend to anybody.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Chuck Russell
Studios:  Heron Communications, Smart Egg Pictures
Starring:  Heather Lagenkamp, Patricia Arquette, Robert Englund; ft. Laurence (Larry) Fishburne, Dick Cavett, Zsa Zsa Gabor
Tagline:  If You Think You're Ready for Freddy, Think Again!
MPAA Rating:  X (wait, what?) or R, depending on where you look
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, slasher, teen
Scare score:  C
Rating:  B+

Plot overview:  Several years after the events of the previous film, teens in the area of Springwood, Ohio are still suffering from a terrible and dangerous figure that lurks in their nightmares: Freddy Krueger (Englund).  This time around, however, Nancy Thompson (Lagenkamp) is back, and she has a plan to make the teens more powerful than their nightmarish nemesis.

The movie starts and I see Patricia Arquette, and I think to myself, "Oh my gosh am I even going to be able to watch this movie?"  I saw Boyhood this summer and was simply baffled (and a little frustrated) by her performance the entire time (around 3 hours).  To her credit, aside from putting on some weight with age, Patricia Arquette looks exactly the same today as she did in 1987.  Unfortunately, her acting hasn't changed much either.  In this third installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, Patricia, in the role of our leading gal Kristen Parker, seems young and naive.  Clearly, she is an actress that only got her start because of her film-famous family.  That being said, Kristen is neutral/ sweet enough that Miss Arquette gives a pretty standard performance, and aside from thinking about how much I didn't like her in Boyhood, she was fine to watch.

The rest of our cast basically gives us the same caliber of performances.  This movie chooses to rely on a small gang of rag-tag teens in the local psych ward, and, as is very much the '80s, we are presented with a vibrantly colored crew.  First we have angsty puppet-making Philip (Bradley Gregg ... who has a decent role in Stand By Me which I told you months ago to go watch), awkward Jennifer (Penelope Sudrow) who dreams of becoming a famous actress, the silent but kind Joey (Rodney Eastman) who we'll be seeing more of, (Latina?) recovering drug addict Taryn (Jennifer Rubin), nerdy and wheelchair bound Will (Ira Heiden), and straight out of Compton "Kincaid" (Ken Sagoes) who we will also see more of in the franchise.  Rounding out the adults in this world are Kristen's glamorous mom (Brooke Bundy), psych ward assistant Max (Fishburne) - casted as Larry Fishburne which is so hilarious to me - caring Dr. Neil Gordon (Craig Wasson), and finally the strict and dubious Dr. Simms portrayed by the familiar Priscilla Pointer who we've seen in Carrie.

The only standoutish performers here are probably Heather Lagenkamp as Nancy, not because she's a particularly great actress so much as because she has graduated from being a stressed, whiny victim in the first film to becoming a stressed out, slightly less whiny fighter in this one.  (Why is it that '80s actresses feel that screaming dramatically constitutes acting?)  Naturally, we have our star Robert Englund as Fred Krueger.  This film is important because a lot of that off colored humor that Freddy is so well known for today starts becoming apparent here.  I was surprised by the sort of dirty, sort of raunchy turn his character has taken by this film.  If anything, it makes him very relatable to teenage audiences (at least of the time), as if he really knew this kids - which he should and does.  His character needs to be playing into the fears of his victims, and in order to do that he has to know who they are and how they function.  Hence begins his commentary on drugs, sex, TV, self-consciousness, and other teen issues and "trending topics."

This film is first and foremost filled with tons of '80s pleasantries: familiar sets and costumes, a generic script, etc.  There was something comfortable about '80s horror, especially in the teen slasher genre, because it was like they always knew what they were getting into.  This movie isn't much different, but it still throws some new, fun plot at us that makes it worthwhile.

The best thing about this movie are the effects, which I've complained about in the prior films.  Like wow I was surprised just how gross and nightmarishly real these things seemed.  Some highlights include:
-Kristen's nightmare when there is a wormlike Freddy eating her and the room is blowing up around her
-The extremely disturbing human puppet sequence.  My skin was crawling
-All those tongues that turn into a nightmare bondage scene
-And especially the disgusting needle sores (the drug content in this film caused it to be banned in some places)

The next best thing about this movie is the plot, which forgets all the victimization of the previous films and instead empowers the teenagers to fight back.  This serves two purposes: making a new plot so that the franchise does not consist of the same movie remade three times, and then it also draws us all in and makes this one of the best and most memorable films in the Nightmare series.  Some things are predictable from the beginning; as soon as we meet Joey the mute I said to myself "Wow I can't wait for him to speak dramatically."  Other things I got wrong, however.  For example, I really expected the prissy Dr. Simms to die at some point in the film.  It seems that Horror Buff makes mistakes, too.

*SPOILER ALERT*

I did have a few issues with the plot.  My main complaint comes from the first time that Nancy attempts group hypnosis with the kids so that Kristen can bring them all into the same dream.  Why do Nancy and Neil get brought into the dream if they weren't asleep?  Or can Kristen take people out of waking reality as well?  Hmm.

My only other big thought on this movie is how I was surprised at times by the graphic nature of it.  Not that it's anything compare to what we see today, but there were a few small things that caught my eye.  I mean, it wouldn't be Nightmare without boobs, so we have that bombshell nurse tricking Joey in one nightmare; nothing we haven't seen in plenty of teen slashers from the '70s onward.  Kincaid's script is beyond ridiculous.  It's almost sad how stereotypically black his jargon is; by the end of the movie it's almost hard to handle.  I think he's the only character that curses in the whole movie.  The drug content is what drew a lot of reactions from raters and audiences.  I mean, for Pete's sake, this movie had an X rating at one point.  We haven't seen that since The Evil Dead, which changed after the creation of NC-17.  Then again, X in the '80s doesn't have the same connotation as it has today, and I'm sure it had to do with a lot of the violence we do see in the film, as well as suicide, talk of rape, etc.

Speaking of which, the disputed origins of Freddy are revealed!  It was kind of interesting to hear this take on his past, which was edited into the final cut of the film but not necessarily the original story Wes Craven had in mind.  "The bastard son of a hundred maniacs" - not to shabby for the start of a monster.

Final critique:  So far in the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, Dream Warriors has been my favorite.  This is a fun, colorful movie that throws us a few more surprises that the first two films did not.  We learn more about our dear friend Freddy, and we also see his character changing and taking on new personalities.  This is the beginning of the Freddy that audiences today will remember, the crude, perverted child murderer with a sense of humor (because, why not?)  I highly recommend this movie, although some audiences are sure to be grossed out or disturbed by some of the content.  Not too scary of a movie, just sort of disgusting in parts.

November Review

For your consideration:

1.  Carrie (1976): A
2.  La maschera del demonio/ Black Sunday (1960): B+
3.  Would You Rather (2012): B-
4.  Friday the 13th Part III (1982): B-/C+