Sittin’ ‘round talkin’ ‘bout THE BLACK ROOM:*

 *DISCLAIMER: We (Mermaid Heather, Zombie Dawn and myself) may be sittin’ ‘round talkin’ but, thanks to the magic of the internet we’re NOT in the same room. Also, my apologies for blatant Apostrophe Abuse Syndrome (AAS) here. 

This conversation was cut and pasted from a Facebook message conversation, and additionally edited by me, Terry Kimmel aka Cattleworks.

Also, you can read Mermaid Heather’s, Zombie Dawn’s and my own review for THE BLACK ROOM at the links.

NOTE: When we had this conversation, I still hadn’t posted my review for THE BLACK ROOM and hadn’t read ZOMBIE DAWN’s review.

Also, WARNING: This conversation about the movie does CONTAIN SPOILERS! So, read at your own peril if you haven’t seen the film yet!

Enjoy!

ZOMBIE DAWN: We have all arrived for the powwow.

MERMAID HEATHER: Yay!

ZOMBIE DAWN: 5 minutes into that movie, I wasn’t sure if I could do it.

MERMAID HEATHER: Why would that be, Dawn?

CATTLEWORKS: Oh, dear! Sorry, Dawn! (considering I picked the movie)

ZOMBIE DAWN: Oh, the acting first off kinda put me off, then like I said in my review, I kinda fell in love with it for just that reason!

The credits totally reminded me of that old show Amazing Stories. Do you guys remember that show?

CATTLEWORKS: Oh, I wasn’t thinking of that, but now that you mention it, yes, I see the similarity.

MERMAID HEATHER: I didn't watch it much, but yes I remember it.

ZOMBIE DAWN: And the guy that who played Paul (Lukas Hassel). Loved his acting. It was a lot of fun.

MERMAID HEATHER: I agree with you there, Dawn, he was my favorite of the bunch.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahaha!! That scene!! With Karen in the bedroom and him trying to seduce her!!

Tell me that wouldn’t have gone differently, hahaha!!

She seemed like “yeah, whatever”.... whaaaaaat?!

CATTLEWORKS: I’ll be honest, I was on the fence and I was curious what Heather thought about the film, so I took a quick peek at her review. I was just curious what you thought, Heather, because I know you like (writer/director) Rolfe Kanefsky.

But I was kind of thumbs down.

ZOMBIE DAWN: I can totally see that.

But I also like films like BAD TASTE.

CATTLEWORKS: The film was very inconsistent for me and the things that bugged me kind of got the better of me.

Well, I feel I’m inconsistent as a reviewer as well, so I’m really self-conscious when I get critical. But a few little things kept happening at the beginning, and so the film was sort of trying to get out of the hole it dug, for me, anyway.

ZOMBIE DAWN: I hear ya!

MERMAID HEATHER: I was in the middle for the most part. I can see why people don't like the film, but it isn't that far off from Kanefsky's other films, so I guess I was more forgiving.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahaha, yeah I wrote and then deleted a lot of stuff that I thought was too critical.

I have a lot of respect for filmmakers and the work that goes into the craft.

I’ll have to look at your review again for those titles, Heather.

CATTLEWORKS: But I liked Lukas Hassel as Paul, too.

ZOMBIE DAWN: And the guy in the beginning... plumber? HVAC guy? Would he really be so bold?

CATTLEWORKS: I think you mean the furnace guy. The plumber guy is the one who gets decapitated.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahaha!!! I met the plumber guy (James Duval)!!! He’s super nice!!

At a con, of course.

MERMAID HEATHER: At one of your conventions?

ZOMBIE DAWN: Yeah, I think it was Crypticon. Maybe 4-5 years back.

MERMAID HEATHER: I hope you get to meet him again, loved that death scene.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Yeah!!! I totally didn’t expect that, haha!!

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, Robert Donovan who played the furnace dude, he was interesting because I think when he was coming on to Jennifer, I think that was meant as comedy, but it came across more genuinely creepy. I actually thought the actor was good, but the tone was more serious than you would expect.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Agreed, Terry.

How about the end scene?

Did you guys call it?

CATTLEWORKS: Wait, which end scene? The very end with Paul and Jennifer in bed?

ZOMBIE DAWN: Haha, yeah Terry.

I was like “ohhhhh, here comes the evil eyes,” hahaha!

MERMAID HEATHER: There was an end scene after the credits, too.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Oh shit! Really?

Dang!!!

I’ll have to watch and amend my review then!

MERMAID HEATHER: I was a little surprised by the scene you were talking about, but it didn't feel like a big shock.

ZOMBIE DAWN: I totally called it, based on the movie as a whole.

CATTLEWORKS: I thought that was a good way to end it. A pseudo-YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN reference (not really) re: Paul’s “equipment” and then Jennifer’s look to the camera, which was great.

MERMAID HEATHER: The after credits scene is just Tiffany Shepis (who played the realtor) giving her speech to a new owner.

It wasn't much really.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Ahhhh.... but would that work? With the incubus inside of Jennifer now?

I’d think the house would just be a house again.

MERMAID HEATHER: Well, there is the gateway there so maybe it would still want to use the house.

ZOMBIE DAWN: True that. All the sigils and whatnot are there...

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, that ending with Tiffany Shepis talking to the next buyers’ of the house does seem to possibly contradict the ending with Jennifer now being possessed.

Maybe they couldn’t make up their mind which ending worked best and decided to put them both in.

Based on your review, Heather, it seems people have been turned off by the sexual aspects of the film?

MERMAID HEATHER: It would seem so, Terry. Lot of reviews put down the soft porn aspect of it.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Honestly, I went in blind.

I had no idea it was an incubus.

Some of it was predictable, but some of it was WTF?

Just thought of that restaurant scene. Paul was on a roll there. I don’t think there was a woman safe from his influence...

But... boobs on the back? Oh jeez!

CATTLEWORKS: Hahaha! Yeah!

MERMAID HEATHER: I had to roll my eyes at that. It was kind of left hanging out there as well.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahahaha!!!

MERMAID HEATHER: Although, she did say she wanted her boobs back.

ZOMBIE DAWN: OMG, you’re right!!!

Hahahaha!!!

CATTLEWORKS: Hahaha! I’ve only seen Kanefsky’s THE HAZING a few years ago, so I chalk that up to Kanefsky’s sense of humor.

ZOMBIE DAWN: What was the line that made you laugh from Lin Shaye, Heather?

MERMAID HEATHER: Just the way she told her granddaughter to put some clothes back on.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahaha!!

MERMAID HEATHER: With that opening scene, Terry, I was wondering if you were trying to turn us on so we would talk dirty to you during this conversation, lol.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Bwahahaha!!!!!

CATTLEWORKS: Actually, I was feeling very self-conscious and I imagined you guys in the same room watching the film with me—not in a comfortable way, he said blushing.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Lol, Terry!!

Oh, and I totally had that thought, too, Heather! About THE ENTITY. Like you mentioned in your review.

(Re: the ending) After Lin Shaye’s character helped Jennifer there in the end, I was rolling!

She looked like she was totally at home, just chillin’ and not in an embryonic sac having the life leeched from her!

CATTLEWORKS: Haha! I thought Jennifer biting that umbilical cord was pretty funny.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Oh my god, I loved it!!!

MERMAID HEATHER: I hope she doesn't bite while doing something else.

CATTLEWORKS: Heather: Oh, dear.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Hahahaha Heather!!!!

And when she’s pushing that umbilical back in?!? Her line “sometimes you have to. PUSH. HARD.”

I was like “ok, I just can’t even with that.”

Hahahaha!!

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, it took me a minute to figure out what exactly she was doing—it turned out to be a “vacuum thing”.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Ahhh, hahaa!!

CATTLEWORKS: I thought Lukas Hassel was great and I liked Natasha Henstridge as well.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Oh yeah, and I agree with Heather. (Natasha Henstridge’s) acting has improved.

Duty calls. Time to pick the girl child up from work.

Thanks for including me, guys!

CATTLEWORKS: I’ll definitely finish and post my review tonight.

ZOMBIE DAWN: Can’t wait to see it!

CATTLEWORKS: I’m glad you can participate. I look forward to reading your review.

MERMAID HEATHER: Glad that you could join us!

ZOMBIE DAWN: Thank you!

(Zombie Dawn leaves conversation)

CATTLEWORKS: Do you have to head out as well, Heather?

MERMAID HEATHER: I can stay longer if you wish.

CATTLEWORKS: Cool.

While working on my review earlier today, I was re-watching parts of the film. Part of me was wondering if I was just being grumpy or tired or just out of it when I first watched it, and that’s why I didn’t like it as much as I did, but I was still distracted by the same bits when I re-watched it. Having said that, the parts I liked, I also still liked. So, I think the film is genuinely a mixed bag, and on top of it is the sexual aspect of the film. Which I had no problem with. Except for my aforementioned self-consciousness…

MERMAID HEATHER: lol You know I would have to give you a hard time if we were watching it in the same room.

CATTLEWORKS: OMG, considering the context of this conversation, that doesn’t sound right, hahaha!

I didn’t realize Kanefsky did the EMMANUELLE films that were on Skinamax, although doing an IMDb search on Robert Donovan, I see he was also in those. I’ve seen some of those films in part, which explains why he looked familiar to me. Mostly, I was struck by Donovan’s voice. I thought he had a cool voice.

MERMAID HEATHER: What bugged you the most about the movie?

CATTLEWORKS: You know, it was really small, specific things, and I felt like a jerk even talking about them in my review.

Weird shit. Trivial shit, but I found it distracting enough that it bugged me.

Or, I should say, it took me out of the film. Like, when the grandmother is arguing with the demon at the beginning, the film cuts back and forth between that argument and also the demon preying on the granddaughter. I found that confusing.

MERMAID HEATHER: I get you. As I said, it wasn't the soft porn part of the story that made me like this movie less, but smaller things as well. Mostly it had to do with the story.

If it was sexual energy the demon wanted/needed...why kill nearly everyone to get it? I'm pretty sure a dead body isn't thinking sexual thoughts anymore.

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, that’s inconsistent, too.

When the furnace man is sort of fondling Jennifer at the washer, I get the idea but it was also strange how they were getting that idea across, too. Like, I thought it worked, but not really. I get what they were doing, but for some reason I was getting hung up on how they were showing it. So, I more or less was biding my time watching this sequence.

And a lot of things were kind of technical, I guess.

Like, for instance, when the furnace man is being dragged backwards in the doorway, and his one hand is being caught in the door (and the door is closing on his fingers) and he’s screaming. Part of me is thinking, okay, I see what’s going on, yes, that would be painful. But, part of me was also wondering why I was kind of detached, like, I was registering all this intellectually, rather than being emotionally moved. Because that’s a horrible thing having a door closing on your fingers like that! That should be a really squeamish moment for the audience, seeing that and imagining how that would feel. I think (we, the audience, don’t feel that) because you don’t really see the edge of the door closing on the guy’s fingers. And I was still thinking about that scene today (I re-watched that scene last night) and I’m wondering why they shot it that way. Of course, this is a very subjective question. Most people would think there wasn’t a problem in the first place! But, I have a possible reason why it was shot the way it was. They had to rig the door in such a way that they could close it and also have the actor’s fingers in the way. So, I’m assuming they widened the gap between the door and where it’s hinged to the frame. If you shoot it from the angle they shot it at, it looks like the door is closing in on the man’s fingers. But if you shoot it where it would look the most painful, with the door pressing on the fingers as it’s trying to close, they can’t because the gap is wider now so you’ll see that the door isn’t even touching his fingers now (I’m assuming). Does that make sense? Yeah, stupid shit like this is what grips my thoughts!

OMG, this is as interesting as, well, like trying to explain a joke! Sorry sorry sorry!

MERMAID HEATHER: You are fine. I get what you are saying about it and I agree.

CATTLEWORKS: It was cool seeing Dominique Swain in the film. It’s been so long since I’ve seen her in a film, I couldn’t figure out why the actress looked familiar, hahaha!

Although, I had issues with Stacy (Dominique Swain’s character) thinking that her husband, Howard (Caleb Scott) ate too much, because he really didn’t look that fat, and that distracted me, too.

MERMAID HEATHER: I know but everyone has their idea of how fat someone should or shouldn't be.

CATTLEWORKS: Yes, but for me, him not being obviously overweight to some degree sort of complicated the joke, tho’ you can also interpret it that Stacy just has hang-ups. Having said that, the idea of her being sexually repressed works when Paul says that to her when he’s sucking her sexual energy out.

You know, re-watching the parts made me also enjoy the parts I did like.

MERMAID HEATHER: I watched it Friday night after work so I was feeling tired when I started it. At times I would perk up and get into the movie and there were times when I started feeling very tired again.

CATTLEWORKS: I was shocked when Paul kills Karen during sex! I was like, really!? She seemed like a strong character. Of course, I didn’t expect to see her again, but then she does re-appear in a significant way.

MERMAID HEATHER: Having the dead help the demon was kind of an odd choice to me.

I could see them getting possessed and helping.

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, I think there were some plot choices that made no logical sense but seemed like a cool thing to do in a genre film.

It was weird. I think I’m usually a much more forgiving audience for a film, especially a genre film, but I guess I also become fixated on things almost arbitrarily.

MERMAID HEATHER: I liked Karen. Her line after seeing Paul naked cracked me up.

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah! Her makeup seemed a bit over the top, but I think that was for comic effect.

MERMAID HEATHER: At first I thought she was just that pale, but in close-ups you can see the makeup. She looked a lot better once they no longer did that.

CATTLEWORKS: I felt there was genuine tension in the first conversation between Paul, Jennifer and Karen. I thought Karen was a real horrible person for no reason, and her explanation after the fact when she’s alone with Jennifer seemed a little too late. I had to warm up to her, although when Paul’s possessed and eyeing all the waitresses blatantly, Karen’s reactions seemed more understandable.

The flashback to the party in the basement in the 70s was fun for nostalgic reasons, although the outrageousness of complete strangers coming to a party and having this demonic ceremony out of the blue is absurd, but I think that’s for comic effect, too. Sort of like, “of course, strangers would do this, it’s a horror movie!”

Although, I’m also thinking, you tell the woman to stay in the circle AFTER she runs out? D’oh!

Is that whole Spirit Board reference an INSIDIOUS in-joke? I’ve never seen the movies, but after the fact, I was wondering.

MERMAID HEATHER: I don't recall there being one in that movie, but it has been a long time since I watched it.

CATTLEWORKS: I only wondered because I only know of Ouija boards and so I wondered what the hell a Spirit Board was. It also seemed to be out of the blue since it never really affects the plot at all.

Yeah, I was going back and forth between picking THE BLACK ROOM and DON”T KILL IT. Mike Mendez directed DON’T KILL IT, but then I wasn’t sure how much of a horror film it was. But, considering you like Rolfe, I went the Kanefsky way.

MERMAID HEATHER: You didn't have to but I'm glad that you did. May have taken me longer to have gotten around to it otherwise.

CATTLEWORKS: The one interesting thing about this movie, I think, is contemplating how sexual subject matter is perceived in film now, especially with the recent #MeToo movement. I don’t mean to be political, but I think it’s a sign of the changing cultural landscape in terms of how much subject matter is responded to now.

Nudity was a sort of given decades ago when Roger Corman was regularly producing drive-in fare. Nudity and violence were simply exploitable plot elements.

I was thinking about this as I was writing my review especially when I was talking about the granddaughter being visited by the demon in the prologue.

MERMAID HEATHER: True. I think in some ways the movement has been taken too far, but that is a different conversation.

I have never been much of a fan of a horror/soft porn cross, but I have nothing against anyone that does enjoy it. Going into this film, and realizing quickly where it was somewhat going, I wasn't sure how much I would like it.

CATTLEWORKS: Yes, that is a different conversation. But, mores have genuinely changed, too. I started to write in my review that the demon “seduces” the young woman as she sleeps, but that’s a euphemism. He’s actually assaulting her. But she doesn’t realize it, because she’s enjoying it, and it’s implied that she thinks she’s enjoying an erotic dream. From a male perspective, it’s enjoyable to watch because it’s a naked attractive woman enjoying sexual pleasure, so the voyeuristic button is being pushed.

The scene where Paul (possessed by the incubus) attacks Karen works with a sort of mainstream horror audience, too, I think, because they’re pushing the monster aspect more. If it was straight-up assault, it would have changed the tenor of the film entirely, I think, and for the worse. Although, you pointed out that there apparently is some criticism of the porn element, anyways. Although, it shows how jaded I am, because the porn aspect didn’t seem that pornographic, haha!

MERMAID HEATHER: No, it didn't. The opening scene borders on it, but as Dawn pointed out, it reminded us both a lot of THE ENTITY so maybe that is what Kanefsky was nodding at for that scene.

CATTLEWORKS: I thought the special effects for that scene were pretty impressive.

MERMAID HEATHER: Was it the effects you were truly impressed by? lol

CATTLEWORKS: Yes, your honor!

Impressive because they seemed believable.

So, I have to track down Kanefsky’s first film now, THERE’S NOTHING OUT THERE.

And I’ve never seen NIGHTMARE MAN.

MERMAID HEATHER: What is taking so long?

CATTLEWORKS: Look who you’re talking to!

What else have you seen by him? We both saw THE HAZING. Have you seen anything else?

MERMAID HEATHER: Just NIGHTMARE MAN and now this movie as far as I can tell.

CATTLEWORKS: Okay.

Well, anything else you wanna say or discuss about THE BLACK ROOM?

MERMAID HEATHER: Just one other thing. While I was confused about the feeding, I was pretty impressed by the set they came up with for that.

CATTLEWORKS: Yeah, it was very imaginative. In a completely different way, I also thought the flashback party scene was fun and imaginative, too. I also thought Karen’s make-up was great when she was killed. I thought Dawn Black (the granddaughter character)’s burn makeup on her face was alright, though. I felt it should’ve been worse. Or, at least, her hair should’ve been shorter or completely gone (although, granted, we see her two years after the furnace incident). Man, I was just a difficult audience throughout this film, haha!

Also, I didn’t realize that “incubus” and “succubus” were gender-related terms. The first is a male demon, the second female.

MERMAID HEATHER: How long have you been a horror fan again? lol

CATTLEWORKS: Maybe too long! Maybe I knew it and forgot it!

MERMAID HEATHER: Sounds like a good excuse to me, lol

CATTLEWORKS: Well, I guess we’re done then for tonight?

MERMAID HEATHER: I guess so. It was fun talking to you and Dawn about this movie. I'm looking forward to the next one.  :)

CATTLEWORKS: Hey, we did two of these things! That’s some crazy-ass crazy-assery!

Thanks for talking a little longer!

MERMAID HEATHER: No problem. Talk to you again soon.

CATTLEWORKS:  :)

There ya go! My apologies to Mermaid Heather and Zombie Dawn for taking so damn long to post this! My editing process wasn’t the most practical.

Meanwhile, the reviews for our next "Netflix connection” movie should be posted March 11. Zombie Dawn’s pick for our next film is: THEY LOOK LIKE PEOPLE (2015), written and directed by Perry Blackshear.

PS. Okay, I’ve tried a couple times to change the font-size on this post (going from “large" to “normal"), and each time I think I’ve done it, but when I look at the actual blog page, it hasn’t changed. Not at all! Also, the smiley face emoji, “  :)  ”  that I end the chat with, comes out as two different symbols. One looks like a computer monitor (?!) and something else... a phone? 
What the heck!

Unless it actually goes through THIS time...

#FeelinLessThanCompetentBlogwiseDammit 

Hot for Everybody: THE BLACK ROOM (2017) review

February 17-22, 2018


The Netflix Connection #2: THE BLACK ROOM

Last month I mentioned that I was hoping to write some more reviews and blog posts and as part of that effort, I tried something out with the help of my friend, horror movie reviewer Mermaid Heather. Since we both are subscribed to Netflix, we decided to pick a movie available from the service, watch it and then each of us write and post a review of said film to our respective blogs and, on top of that, also have a discussion about the movie (SPOILER ALERT!). To start us off last month, Heather picked the South Korean historical mystery thriller, THE SILENCED (2015), and to our delight, we both liked it a lot.

So, with our maiden voyage having gone so well, we’re embarking on our second cinemaphilic excursion. We also welcome a third passenger, reviewer Zombie Dawn, who has a blog at Top Horror Movies Club!

This month, it was my turn to choose our diabolical entertainment and I selected THE BLACK ROOM. In my review for THE SILENCED, I took forever getting around to the movie and what I thought of it. This time out, screw that! Let’s just jump in, shall we?

THE BLACK ROOM (2017, written and directed by Rolfe Kanefsky; with Natasha Henstridge, Lukas Hassel, Lin Shaye, Augie Duke, Caleb Scott, and Dominique Swain)

Paul and Jennifer Hemdale (played by Lukas Hassel and Natasha Henstridge) buy a new house and it seems perfect, even already furnished. As the realtor (Tiffany Shepis) explains, the previous owner suffered a family tragedy - someone was severely burned by the furnace in the basement - and the bad memories associated with the house compelled the family to move out as quickly as possible. Paul tells the realtor that they plan to replace the furnace immediately as a precaution. As the couple step into their new abode, romance is immediately on their mind, and they look forward to consummating their status as new home owners in the imagined love nest. Of course, being a horror film, there are complications… like the mysterious, locked black room in the basement that hides a presence with its own agenda for the couple, although its objective is surprisingly, equally intimate, just less romantic in spirit…

Since it was my turn to pick a film for our monthly review/chat, I was going back and forth about what film to pick from the various choices on Netflix… until I saw Rolfe Kanefsky’s name as writer/director on this film. There are a handful of directors whose stuff I like and I look forward to checking out their filmography because they’re not quite as famous in the mainstream but still manage to put out inventive and creative work. A couple of these directors are Fred Olen Ray (HOLLYWOOD CHAINSAW HOOKERS from the good ol’ 80s VHS days, A PRINCE FOR CHRISTMAS, A MOTHER’S REVENGE) and Mike Mendez (BIG ASS SPIDER!, CONVENT, GRAVEDANCERS, and DON’T KILL IT, which happens to be available on Netflix and what I almost picked instead). I became aware of Ray’s output during the VHS boom and I started following Mendez after seeing THE CONVENT because the then girlfriend (now wife) of a friend of mine had a scene as a demonic nun. But Rolfe Kanefsky is someone I came to know because of Mermaid Heather. She really enjoyed his films, THE HAZING (now called DEAD SCARED) and NIGHTMARE MAN, and specifically mentioned him by name, so I watched THE HAZING and also filed away Kanefsky's name as someone to watch for. Seeing that THE BLACK ROOM was another “Rolfe Kanefsky Flick,” it seemed a perfect choice for our little film club. So, it was with some added anticipation that I sat down to watch this film.

The film actually starts off not with Paul and Jennifer buying the house but the night of the family tragedy two years previous. An old woman (Lin Shaye) is asleep in bed and, in a separate room, so is her adult granddaughter, Dawn (Alex Rinehart). Meanwhile, something is restless in the basement: there’s a boarded up door and on the planks sealing up the door is a strange symbol painted in red. And someone (or something) is hammering away from inside to get out. Soon strange events transpire. An apparent supernatural presence represented by smoke appears to break free from the ductwork and also remove the symbol from the imprisoning wood. The old woman suddenly wakes up and senses that this presence is in the house; in fact, she seems to have some sort of association with it and she’s not happy that it’s roaming about. As the woman argues with the presence from her bed, simultaneously we see that it’s also visiting with the granddaughter. Reminiscent of the sexually predatory spirit of THE ENTITY, the presence begins to have its way with the young woman while she sleeps. Soon, the grandmother realizes to her horror what’s happening and rushes off to intervene, interrupting the sexual assault and then, with some sort of talisman she has, she chases the thing out of the room and back into the basement.

Ultimately, the sequence builds to a fiery climax as the granddaughter follows after “Nana” and stumbles into the sinister, unbelievable mysteries of the black room in the basement.

When Paul and Jennifer buy the house two years later, the literally inhuman prisoner that’s been trapped downstairs has a new opportunity to escape.

Aroused by their new surroundings, the couple’s ambitions for romance are stymied by either bad timing - like, the furnace inspector’s appearance - or inconvenient interruptions - like, Jennifer’s younger sister, Karen (Augie Duke), who’s not the biggest fan of Paul and who happens to be visiting them, just earlier then expected. Further complicating things is the release of the imprisoned demon who then possesses Paul. I know! All Paul and Jennifer wanna do is get laid! WTF!

Let me say straight off, because of my anticipation in watching the film I was disappointed by parts of it. I found the film curiously uneven for my tastes, right from the start. In the same way that Paul and Jennifer seem to have no luck in getting it on in the house, although they both are definitely in the mood, I felt the film had similar ambitions to achieve certain pleasures for the genre movie fan - horror, sex, gore, humor - but for this occasionally moody film fan (uh, me), little things would break the mood. Speaking broadly, the movie seemed like a string of things that I thought worked and things that I thought didn’t. And some of the things that didn’t work for me were so small and picky that if I were to describe them (oh, don’t worry, I will, or at least one or two of those things) I think I’d come off as a fussy jerk, and that may be true, but speaking for myself, I found these elements distracting enough that it affected my enjoyment of the film.

For instance, right from the start, that prologue with the grandmother, Margaret Black (listed in the credits as Miss Black), and her granddaughter, Dawn. During the argument with demon, we only hear Miss Black’s side of the “conversation.” At first she seems to be only addressing a presence that she senses is awake in the house, but later it almost seems she’s talking to the demon. Either she senses what it wants or it’s talking to her in her head and we can’t hear it. I had no problem with this, but either way the conversation had enough specific details in it that it seemed a bit Basil Exposition-y.
Still, as Dawn is kissed by and fondled by an invisible assailant while she's sleeps, and some of the special effects were impressively and believably done, like when her lips are kissed and her nipples are played with. Dawn clearly responds favorably, as if she were giving in to an erotic dream of her own invention. As a fan of some sexploitation films and horror films that have nudity in them (sometimes because they have nudity in them, like director Jean Rollins’ entire oeuvre), this sexual aspect of the prologue wasn’t a problem with me. But it took me a while to accept that the demon was in both rooms at the same time, which seemed inconsistent with Miss Black’s argument with the demon. So, there was momentary confusion on my part.

Reading that last paragraph over, this “criticism” seems lame. But, there were a number of weird things - perhaps even trivial things - that just took me out of the film, even briefly, that I found distracting.

Having said that, while writing this review, I was revisiting parts of the film, and conversely, there were parts that I definitely enjoyed.
For instance, I liked tall, good-looking Lukas Hassel’s performance as Paul, especially when he’s inhabited by the demon, well, more accurately, an incubus, and he starts looking at all the women around him as things to be played with and interacted with sexually. Speaking of which, I actually learned an incubus is a male version of a succubus (I know, I’m slow!), and by definition, both are demons that have sexual intercourse with sleeping members of the opposite sex; although in this case, our incubus is horny 24/7), There’s also a nice moment when the incubus admires himself (Paul) appreciatively in a cool wall mirror, as he sees the body he’s inhabiting for the first time.

Also, the cast had a nice mix of actors, with Natasha Henstridge (of SPECIES, another sexually themed horror movie), Lin Shaye (most recently seen in the INSIDIOUS films), Tiffany Shepis (popular veteran of a number of low-budget horror films), Dominique Swain (who I mostly remembered being in Adrian Lyne’s version of LOLITA), and Robert Donovan (who is in the EMMANUELLE series of soft core cable films). Despite some comments about Henstridge’s past acting abilities, I’ve liked her in the few things I’ve seen her in (okay, in SPECIES her best attributes were visual but even so, I thought her acting consistent with an alien visitor, and I don’t mean that as a back-handed compliment) and I liked her in this.

There was some cool gore make-up effects, even a pretty cool one, like the one applied to Karen in a frisky scene between her and Paul.

There’s a fun and bizarre flashback sequence of a party set in the 70s in the basement of the house.

The end climax in the black room is also imaginatively realized. And, speaking of which, its great seeing the various members of the cast happily subjecting themselves to some strange, low-budget genre circumstances, like Lin Shaye covered in goo and trapped in an alien-looking set, along with almost everybody else.
The whole scene in the restaurant offers some more outrageous moments and also gets to reference, in spirit, one of Kanefsky’s other credits, CLICK, a soft-core cable series based on the erotic Milo Manara comics.

Or, in another scene, Hassel enthusiastically having an extended make-out scene with a wall and groping hands (a la Roman Polanksi’s REPULSION) while he’s covered in goo.

On the other hand, there were times I was less enamored with THE BLACK ROOM.
Like, Karen in her first scene. They establish that there’s no love lost between Paul and Karen, but when Karen gets there, obviously made up (for extreme comic effect, I’m assuming) as a Goth girl, she seems so antagonistic towards Paul, she just comes across as a bitch, so I’m wondering why she was even invited to the house. Although, once we get through the first confrontational scene, I found her character’s scenes more tolerable. So, I’m chalking that up to the writing, not Augie Duke’s performance, who I found interesting. It was just an off-putting introduction to Karen.

When Jennifer’s trying to use the washing machine and it turns into a moment when the incubus is arousing her via the furnace man (but not really, uh…), that juxtaposition between what is actually happening and what Jennifer can actually see (and not see) was a cool idea but didn’t work for me. Part of it was because Oscar, the furnace man (Robert Donovan), looked like he’s touching Jennifer all over but he really wasn’t, his hands are just really close to her body. I found that weird and thought his hands should be on her, and then through editing, you can see that its actually his presence touching her, but she can’t see him. They still do that with the editing, but I thought the way Kanefsky chose to show how Oscar interacts with her distracting.

Also, there were times when some of the scenes in the black room itself fell kind of flat for me. Like, the room itself was merely a device (at times) to have weird shit happen, and to a certain degree, I understand (even embrace) that way of creating a scene or moving the plot along in a low-budget horror movie. But, sometimes, I just didn’t buy what was happening or didn’t think it was that compelling. And I was disappointed that the room never really developed an aura of foreboding whenever we came to it, like, Regan’s bedroom in THE EXORCIST. Okay, that’s probably an unfair apples and oranges comparison, but, still, I still felt that as a viewer I should have more dread whenever we entered this room.

As the incubus’ physical conduit, Paul’s bit of exposition via the basement party flashback also seems very convenient. True, it allows Kanefsky a chance to have fun with the incubus’ origin story, but some elements of the party are nonsensical. For instance, why would the incubus be conjured in the first place at a party, especially (if I understood this correctly) which would seem like an elaborately impulsive act by uninvited strangers. Although, perhaps it was intended to be absurd and funny for its incongruity, which is quite possible, but if so, it didn’t come across that way for me. In the same way that the furnace man’s inappropriate comments to Jennifer in the basement when the couple first encounter him may have been meant to be taken more humorously, but they came across genuinely creepy. So, these both might be issues of directorial tone.
Also, I wondered why the incubus felt compelled to reveal this whole origin story in the first place with Jennifer and Karen. Part of me thinks he was coming on to Karen because of her "Goth-y knowledge" of the occult and so, was almost bragging about his origins to her as a way to impress and seduce her..? I think the way the conversation begins at the table, there’s some evidence of the writer/director’s intention. And I think that idea works, but then it wasn’t really developed and it just comes across as exposition. And if that wasn’t the idea, then it really just comes across as expostiion.
Re: special effects make-up, there’s also a scene where we get to see burn make-up and that looks pretty good, too. Although, I’ll be honest, part of me also felt the degree of the disfigurement also seemed too tame, but that’s probably just me being a pain-in-the-ass. Although, I also thought we shouldn’t have seen the victim’s long hair, as if the fire only affected her face. True, we see the results of the accident two years later, still... Howvere, the way the victim dresses all enshrouded in black adds a nice mysterious touch.
Finally, occasional plot inconsistencies. For instance, if there’s only one incubus, how was he in two rooms simultaneously in the opening prologue? 

Most viewers probably won’t be having second helpings of the film like I did, and when I first watched this film, I wasn’t as forgiving over-all. So if I were to rate this film in some way, I’d give it a straight up 50/50, a sadly wishy-washy rating on my part.

Still, after watching this, I’m re-invigorated to track down some of Kanefsky’s other horror films, especially his first film, THERE’S NOTHING OUT THERE and also NIGHTMARE MAN. Because Kanefsky seems attracted to genre elements I like as well, namely, sex, horror, gore and nudity and mixing them up.

Also, check out what Mermaid Heather and Zombie Dawn had to say about THE BLACK ROOM.

Holy crap, it took me forever to write this review (and I missed my deadline by three days!), but, better late than never, by god!

We Like to Watch/The Netflix Connection (#1): THE SILENCED (2015)

January 21, 2018

Holy crap! It’s 2018!
Happy New Year, dear faithful blog-readers*!

Last year I started and/or worked on several posts for this blog. Uh... sixteen, to be exact. Jeez.
JEEZ!
Okay, to be honest, some of these drafts were only titles of films with an intention to "bang out” some sort of review (or at least puke out some feedback on) later and it just never came to be. Some were actually a few paragraphs long and I just wasn’t able to finish the deal. So, yeah: sixteen. Pretty impressive number, huh? Wait, hang on... For actual published posts in 2017, I had...

...ONE.

Oh, man. Lame.
Alright, alright... in my meager defense, 2017 was an INCREDIBLY stressful year for me. My wife and I moved for the first time in 18 years out of our first home as a married couple (yes, we lived in joyful sin in a couple apartments first). We thought that first home was going to be our ‘starter home” but... EIGHTEEN YEARS LATER. So, now we’ve moved into our retirement home, dammit! And yes, moving is stressful on its own, but the real stress was we were doing a lot of remodeling and... by philosophical choice, I’m not a home improvement person. At all. As to why, I’ll only explain simply by saying that when I helped my dad out doing home repairs around the house as a child and eventually as an adult, it was like watching Frick and Frack at work. Our “efforts” at fixing things around the house left much to be desired aesthetically, and as a result I eventually became a perfectionist AND also felt I’d never achieve those standards, so I avoided home repairs completely.
And then 2017 totally bit me in the ass. Our “new” house - which we inherited from my dad when he passed away in 2016, and was actually my home when I was nine until sometime after college and then I finally moved out - needed a lot of work. We hired various contractors to do the main work, but I did most of the painting inside. There were some other smaller tasks, too. So, anyway, I was distracted in 2017, big time.

“Okay,” interrupts the faithful blog reader, “that explains your laughable output in 2017. But, in 2016 you only posted five times. And in 2015, why, no posts at all! What was keeping you from writing those years..?”

Those are valid points and that is an excellent question.
Um...

Okay, enough about me!
What about this damn movie, THE SILENCED?

In an effort to post substantially more this year, I’ve enlisted my good pal, Mermaid Heather.
Heather has been chugging along spectacularly (or, should I say, swimmingly - ha!) with her own unabashedly self-titled horror-movie review blog, Mermaid Heather, for over a decade. This will be her 12th year reviewing! Plus, she also is the main contributor at Top Horror Movies Club. She is a movie-watching AND reviewing machine!
Anyway, several times she reviews films I’ve never even heard of before. Okay, that ain’t saying much. I rarely see movies in the theater or watch commercial television, so I don’t see a lot of trailers for new films. So, most new titles I’d see were on the shelf at our former Family Video, which I’d go to infrequently. Also, Heather had Netflix and I didn’t.
Until we moved.
In a game-changing technological advance in our humble household similar to the year when we got a new computer that could finally handle the Youtube channel (that was HUGE), we now have a TV that allows us to watch Netflix and indulge in the modern magic of streaming movies and TV shows. For instance, I finally saw the first season of STRANGER THINGS, a show I’ve only read about in other people’s Facebook posts! Also, in an equally earth-shattering development, I now have a new set of headphones so I can finally watch movies properly with sound. See, my wife usually goes to bed before me and in our old house our TV was downstairs below the bedroom. So, when I watched TV, I didn’t want to disturb her, so I’d mute the TV and watch with the subtitles on. Not quite the same as watching with the sound on.
But now, now I’m catching up with social media, current popular culture and my own impulsive cinemaphilia. Comparatively speaking, at least.

But getting back to Heather’s numerous reviews of things she’s seen on Netflix:
So, I asked her if she’d be interested in having a very small “movie club”- me and her, specifically - and check out horror movies on Netflix together. My motivation was two-fold: to increase my blogging output and review more films, but more importantly, to be able to discuss a film more thoroughly with someone else who had seen the film.
And Heather, forever patient and forgiving**, said yes.
The format: we each post our own review of the selected film at our own blog on the same date (with a link to the other’s review, natch!). We follow it up with a discussion of the film (NOTE: SPOILERS!).
For our maiden effort I invited Heather to make the first choice, and then we’d alternate picking films from there.
She picked THE SILENCED.


THE SILENCED (2015, South Korean; Written and directed by Hae-yeong Lee; Cast: Bo-young Park (Joo-ran/Shizuko), So-dam Park (Yeon-duk/Kazue), Ji-won Uhm (Headmistress), Ye-ji Kong (Yuka), Seong-yeon Park (Counselor), Bo-Bi Joo (Kihara), Se-in Park (Eguchi), Won-Hee Go (Shizuko))

NOTE: What in tarnation! 848 words later he finally gets around to his freaking review..! (I know, it’s either feast or famine...)***

The film begins with an aerial shot of a car driving along a winding road through a forested landscape. It’s reminiscent of the beginning of Stanley Kubrick’s THE SHINING (1980). In the car there is a teenage girl sitting alone in the back seat. In front a well-dressed woman sits and the driver is a chauffeur. Right from the start, there’s tension.  The girl, also well-dressed in red, looks apprehensive. The woman’s expression seems cold and distant.
The car pulls up to a closed gate and it is let in. It opens up into a clearing and we see the grounds and a large building, where a title informs us, “Sanitorium School Near Seoul, 1938.” In the headmistress’s office, we learn that the girl, Shizuko, is being left there while the woman goes on to Tokyo, whose husband is already there. The headmistress, Kato Sanae (played by Ji-won Uhm), who seems very kind, sits across from Shizuko and tells her that “she’s on her own now. But, so is everyone else here.” The headmistress also assures her that she’ll be healthy again soon. We see Shizuko clutch a white handkerchief in her hands.
As soon as Shizuko’s mother leaves the school, it seems the young student is in for misery. All her personal things are removed and her outfit is replaced by a uniform. When she tries to at least keep her diary, the Counselor admonishes her to behave and suddenly slaps her, informing her strictly that she must follow “regulation.”
We also learn that another student was previously at the school and then abruptly left. Coincidentally, her name was Shizuko as well. Due to circumstance, our protagonist - the second Shizuko (Bo-young Park) - is now taking her place, not only numerically but physically as well, such as using her old bed. This perceived act of replacement along with the similar name seems to be stirring up conflicting emotions with two students, Kazue and Yuka, who knew the departed girl. Yuka’s interactions with Shizuko are immediately confrontational, even bullying as she throws little stones at Shizuko in the middle of the night as she more or less interrogates her in front of the other students. Kazue, meanwhile, turns out to be more supportive and helpful by comparison, something you would hope for from another student when you're brand new to a place. Although, this also causes tension and confusion in Yuka who feels that Kazue is betraying the first Shizuko’s memory. Another student, Kihara, seems to be friendly towards Shizuko, although unlike Kazue, is a bit more awkward and eccentric in personality.
While all this drama is going, Shizuko is also constantly dealing with her sickness. When she has a coughing spell in front of the students, she coughs up blood, and Yuka wonders aloud if it’s TB, with the other girls immediately trying to distance themselves from Shizuko.
The headmistress soon learns that Shizuko has coughed up blood, and prescribes a regular IV for her in hopes of making her better. But even the first IV process looks painful with the needle going into her arm and the poor girl lying there in bed for the treatment. My heart totally went out to Shizuko for her situation and the sensitive way actress Bo-young Park portrays her.
Finally, there’s a mystery going on at the school, foremost is why did the first Shizuko leave so suddenly and without explanation? But then another student suddenly leaves in the middle of the night. And Kihara, the awkward student, suddenly acts erratically, even violently, with no apparent reason. And our troubled Shizuko seems to be the lightening rod for all these developments. Was the first Shizuko’s departure actually the tip to a more ominous iceberg? And are there other secrets, perhaps of a more sinister nature, going on at the school? It’s this persistent mystery of the story that distinguishes it from becoming simply a teen drama and pushes THE SILENCED quietly into genre territory.
But which genre?

Right off the bat, let me say I really enjoyed this film. I think Hae-yeong Lee did a wonderful job with both the writing and the direction, and he was ably assisted by the performances of the cast, especially Bo-young Park as Shizuko, So-dam Park as Kazue and Ji-won Uhm as the headmistress. At the beginning of the film, Shizuko's behavior is extremely tentative, she’s barely audible when she speaks due to shyness, and her movements are tentative because of her illness. Her misery is palpable.
Also, the way Lee introduces the mystery elements are very carefully done. Shizuko is startled in the middle of the night by the appearance of a student under a bed who then scurries away in the dark. Did Shizuko dream it? When she sees a bloody student under the staircase and then she tries to tell someone to no avail, is Shizuko hallucinating? Or are these bizarre moments red herrings? Meanwhile, Shizuko and Kazue’s interaction together deepens into a friendship, but also yields more fragmented answers and questions about the first Shizuko and her unsatisfactorily explained departure. Altogether, I thought it was good storytelling assisted with good performances.
Besides the excellent work of the leads I also wanty to mention the multi-faceted, sympathetic portrayal by actress Bo-bi Joo as somewhat goofy, friendly Kihara, who also has two separate scenes where she’s required to be very specifically physical with her own body and in a disturbing, believable way.

As a horror film, this really isn’t. It’s more of a dark mystery. Maybe even a historical mystery, but not so much like a period film, but more in that as the story plays out there’s a reason it’s set in the late 30s. But the film’s main selling point for me was the interaction between the cast, particularly the growing friendship between Shizuko and Kazue.
And for me, another element of interest was historical. At one point, Kazue takes Shizuko to a “secret basement” no longer in use “where everything is broken” and she asks Shizuko what her given name was. It’s Joo-ran. Kazue’s says her name was Yeon-duk. Huh? Yeah, that whole exchange confused me. ****
At the end of the movie, I realized that the film pointedly takes place prior to World War II, and more importantly, involves Japan. Other than what basic things I knew about U.S. and Japanese involvment during the war, beyond that scope my actual world historical knowledge is limited or nil. I knew previously that Japan had invaded China (at some point), but I knew nothing about Japan and Korea. Hell, I know little specifically about Korea (either North or South) as it is today. So, I wondered (incorrectly) if the school had assigned Japanese names to these Korean students. But after watching the movie, I did a little internet research and according to the “Korea under Japanese rule” Wikipedia page, the Japanese Empire annexed Korea in 1910. Imperial Japanese rule of the country ended when the Japanese surrendered in 1945, with the country breaking into North and South Korea, self-ruled but under different systems: the North supported by the Soviet union, the South supported by the U.S. But, I digress.
During the years of Korea’s Japanese rule, at one point Japan formally decided to assimilate the Koreans into Japan and the Koreans adopted Japanese names. Actually, this formally happened in 1939, a year after the film takes place. Prior to that, historically, Japan followed a completely different policy, where they didn’t want Koreans changing their names. So, if that’s true, the movie is fudging that timeline.
But, whatever, it helped me understand this whole double-name thing better. Some kind of understanding of this Japanese-Korean history also deepens and ultimately informs the film’s story, too.

I’m making a point of not saying too much about the plot because I think it’s more enjoyable to see how the story develops without knowing too much ahead of time. I think the strange triangle of friendship and distrust involving Shizuko/Joo-ran, Kazue/Yeon-duk and Yuka was well-executed. One of the things I liked about this story was the use of genre/fantasy to comment on social realities. When Shizuko/Joo-ran and Kazue/Yeon-duk reveal their given names, they make a point of using those names amongst each other. When the counselor talks about the importance of “regulations,” are both of these elements deliberate comments about Imperialist Japan’s influence on society, especially Korean society?
When the drugs seem to be working on Joo-ran’s health, actress Bo-young Park does a nice job showing Joo-ran’s growing confidence in herself, physically and emotionally. When the film starts to approach the more fantastic repercussions of the story, like Joo-ran’s spectacular standing up to another one of Yuka’s bullying outbursts, writer/director Lee deftly utilizes this plot development to also expand on the relationship and tragic secrets of Yeon-duk and the first Shizuko. And that also works in a thread about personal self-repression which seems appropriate at a setting with maturing adolescents learning to handle difficult and strong emotions.
There’s also a nice bit where we see how the Counselor learned how to be so strict.
I wonder if the headmistress’s ultimate motivations in how she ran the sanitorium are based on some cultural background of the time, too, in terms of a woman’s place in either Korean or Japanese society. I’m not sure. I’ll have to do some more Wikipedia-ing and Googling.

To be honest, I think the ending may be just a bit too much believability-wise for some viewers, but I liked it. But we do go more into speculative fiction in the last half hour. Still, as we learn about what’s going on at the school, part of me wondered about/predicted some of the climactic developments, and they were more or less fulfilled to some degree, at least in spirit, so it didn’t bother me too much.
Having said that, there is a lot that does happen in the end. The film moves steadily along showing us more information, going from point A then to B then to C, etc., but at the end when things accelerate in intensity, there are some convenient storytelling devices to move things along from, like, uh, point M to Z. For example, a film projector that suddenly and conveniently turns on mostly to help with exposition in a scene, for instance.
But I still found the whole film satisfying, an enjoyable experience especially through the eyes of the characters Joo-ran and Yeon-duk. In that regard, I greatly appreciated the fact that the filmmakers found time to have a little epilogue in the secret basement.

As a footnote, after watching this film I’m reminded (very superficially mind you, but that won’t stop me from bringing it up) of another film I saw in the past year or so, that has some similarities: it’s set in a school (an American public high school), and a student has afflictions that seem beyond real. In fact, as the story progresses they seem to be of a spiritual/demonic nature. That 2014 film is HIGH SCHOOL EXORCISM (aka HIGH SCHOOL POSSESSION). In that film’s case, the filmmakers made a broader effort at embracing their genre elements and it was a bit misleading, arguably, unless you were speaking metaphorically (am I being vague enough for you, dear annoyed reader?). Although, the ending in that film gets more extreme in behavior towards the end, too. Still, from what I remember (and comparing apples and pears really), THE SILENCED's various elements were handled much better.

Finally, watching this film was a bit of a cultural eye-opener, which I welcomed. Sometimes, you watch foreign genre films and it seems the biggest difference is language. But occasionally, you see some other things that have to be explained. There are some cultural things that we take for granted in this country, because it’s our country and we’re more familiar with its history. So, for instance, the Civil War is part of that knowledge and regional cultural teaching, rightly or wrongly. There are some assumptions we make or are led to believe about the south and southern people, etc., even if it’s a stereotype, sometimes, but we know those stereotypes, because we’ve been taught them or we’ve seen them. So, that sort of similar knowledge that a Korean or Japanese audience has about their own country is lost on us. But, I think it’s cool when a film allows us a bit of a foot (maybe a toe is more acccurate) into one of the doors opening into a country’s history and culture and invites us to open it wider.

And here is the link for Mermaid Heather’s review of THE SILENCED.
Holy cow! I watched the movie AND reviewed it in time for the deadline! I’m gonna buy a lottery ticket!

POSTSCRIPT: Heather and I also did a follow-up conversation about the movie on Facebook messenger. One of the reasons I wanted to do this “film club” with Heather was to also talk about a film that we both have seen while we still remember it. Heather posted our discussion at her blog and you can read it here. NOTE: SPOILER ALERT!


* HAHAHAHA! I used a plural! I kill me!
** Heather has enlisted my help on reviews in the past with mixed results from me. My spirit was enthusiastically willing, but my flesh was weakly inconsistent in the execution. I’ll leave it at that.
*** (No, it’s “someone needs an editor...”)
**** Further confusion. In the film, the subtitles had the spelling of Joo-ran’s name as “Ju-ran” but on IMDb, it’s "Joo-ran.” There’s a number of different spellings, including for some actresses and also the writer/director’s name. I think I tried to keep it consistent to the IMDb spellings, but there’s no guarantee. I’m not used to these Korean names, so I was mostly trying to spell them correctly on top of keeping them straight. That was the intent, at least...

"I like to watch.” Thoughts from an Older Cinemaphile/Still-Aspiring Filmmaker on attending a college horror film class

The blogger at the Mothman Museum in Point Pleasant, W. Virginia, back in June, 2012. 

A pseudo-horror film related image...

April 23 - October 7, 2017

Well, the last time I posted was four months ago*, December 20.
Since then, the most productive I’ve been with regards to this blog is simply watching movies and adding it to my list of films that I’ve seen this year (which you can find in the margin at the right, natch!). Although I wish I were more productive in the writing/posting department, I am glad that I seem to finally be watching some movies with regularity, something that I seemed to start doing the last couple years and then really got into the swing of things by the end of 2016. I think a strong finish fueled by my regular attendance to the 10-day Buffalo Dreams Fantastic Film Festival in November really helped. My goal was to arbitrarily watch 100 films last year and I wasn’t sure I was going to pull it off by the end of October, but Buffalo Dreams got me into a film watching groove.
Since then, I’ve been on a tear.
My impulsive decision at the beginning of February to audit a Horror Film Class at SUNY Brockport has also helped immensely. There’s still a couple weeks of that class, but it’s been a really great experience watching a number of classic and influential films in the genre. I got into the class a couple weeks late, so I missed some silent films (like PHANTOM OF THE OPERA), but I started off strong with FRANKENSTEIN, DRACULA (the 1931 Tod Browning directed/Bela Lugosi version) and I also watched the simultaneously shot Spanish-language version (George Melford directed/Carlos Villarias as the Count).
On one level, it’s been great seeing the different trends in horror through the years, seeing the early models for the horror film with the Universal films, but then other efforts like 1942’s CAT PEOPLE, which I really loved and was impressed by. There were also classics that I had seen before and now re-visited, like 1956’s INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and 1968’s NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. Updates of the Universal monster classics, like Hammer Films’s more colorful and more overtly erotic HORROR OF DRACULA, and the fascinating career “misstep” by respected British director Michael Powell, PEEPING TOM (1960). I had seen the Powell film years ago (ca. 1980) at the Pittsburgh Playhouse but had forgotten much of it. Seeing it again, I was very much impressed by PEEPING TOM, especially it’s sympathy for the troubled main character, Mark, which echoes similar sympathetic (and similarly impressive) treatment for troubled main character Irena in the original CAT PEOPLE. So interesting to know that PEEPING TOM derailed Powell’s career, but that failure also proved to be an instructive lesson for Alfred Hitchcock and his handling of his controversial but instead successful, and ultimately, influential film, PSYCHO, made later the same year.
A quick visit to J-horror territory with RINGU (for the first time) made me also want to re-visit director Gore Verbinski’s American remake, THE RING. I loved THE RING when I first saw it, and now that I’ve seen the original, I actually prefer the remake. But, watching them both made me mentally join the pair of films in the same way I've done to the two 1931 DRACULA films. Regarding the dual 1931 depiction of Dracula: although I definitely have a personal preference - I enjoy the Spanish DRACULA more than the more famous Lugosi film - after watching both it’s hard not to compare back and forth between the two. Interestingly, watching the Spanish film made me also appreciate some of the differences of the English language edition, and specifically, I believe, Browning’s directorial hand. RINGU and THE RING have equally fused themselves as Siamese celluloid twins in my head and it’s hard not to compare the two as I watched one.
With the end of class on the horizon only two weeks away, I’m thinking what attending this class has done for me, or more accurately, to me.
As a self-described aspiring filmmaker and also as a (supposed) cinemaphile blogger, I can tell the class has already affected my thinking in both areas.
From a filmmaking perspective, I’ve been considering the creative choices in these films and how they impacted their audiences, how these films managed to make an impression on a culture, not only within the horror genre but beyond it sometimes. One of the most significant elements in some of these important films is that of ambiguity in the handling of the material which lends itself to more flexibility in thematic interpretation and audience ownership of the film’s subject and (interpreted) themes. This has both a cultural effect (raising a film’s importance as cinematic art) and an economic effect (more people who have a significant reaction to a film results in more word of mouth, more publicity, more box office).
As for my blog, i.e my writing about films, I feel like I’ve been seduced by the “academic side” now: I’m reading more into a film and debating its meanings and interpretations. But, this is also influences my ideas towards screenwriting, wondering how to make the material I’m writing more accessible to an audience as a jumping point for ideas and themes in their own interpretations/reactions to the film I’m writing. Hopefully they’ll be getting something out of the movie more than simply the plot or plot elements, but also possibly something to intellectually chew on as well.
So, potentially, the benefits for having attended this class I think are genuine, but in actuality, now it’s a matter of my executing on these new ideas and ambitions. Dammit! Well, we’ll see how this shakes out in that area.

But, in the meantime, I’ve felt particularly fulfilled having watched all these movies and in this academic context, studying them and also discussing them with others afterward. As a matter of fact, even though I haven’t said much about the class discussions after we've watched a film, that part of the class dynamic has also been a rewarding and even eye-opening experience. It’s been a great and educational process altogether and I’m really thankful I impulsively took the plunge to attend Professor Carter Soles’s inaugural voyage teaching this film class. (NOTE: Carter has been teaching different film courses for a few years already, but each one with a different emphasis focus-wise. This class was his first time teaching a syllabus with the focus on horror).

*Okay, make that almost TEN months ago.