Movies: Horror Movie Discussion

[shadow1]

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now. At least you got to fully exercise your rating system. Sharks of the Corn reminds me of ThanksKilling, which I watched last year and is about a fake-looking turkey killing rural townspeople. I gave that a 3/10, though. Often, I wonder if I'm too generous. I've given a 1/10 only once, and that was for Santa and the Ice Cream Bunny. I like to save that score for the "What was I thinking even putting this on and not immediately turning it off" movies. Sharks of the Corn sounds like that kind of movie.

I don't like to give 1's either (this is only my sixth ever), so I get it. The rare times I have given them, I usually have to talk myself into it.

This was not one of those times though. Sharks of the Corn was a chore, aside from the first kill which was legitimately funny. I honestly wasn't sure if I should review it, the production and overall quality is so low it sticks out like a sore thumb amongst other movies on IMDB/Letterboxd. Like yeah, Leprechaun: Origins (my other recent "1") is horrible, but you can tell it was made by an actual studio. You and I could make Sharks of the Corn.

I actually had more internal conflict about the score of Disciples of the Crow. But they cut a rabbit's head off for their stupid movie, so screw 'em.

 

[CDJ]

The Watchers by Ishana Night Shyamalan (2024)

M.Night’s daughter made her directorial debut at 24/25 with this one. It’s not reviewing well with critics but is getting a more middling score from audiences. I kinda liked it to be honest- its origins lie in Irish lore, the setting was beautiful, the monsters were genuinely creepy, It was nice to see Dakota Fanning…I forgot she existed! She did good. The crazy old lady from Tarot was in it too. She plays the same kinda character in every PG-13 horror movie apparently.

You can tell it’s written and directed by a Shyamalan, the end started to lose me a little but she did a better job than her dad did in some of his movies in terms of getting things back on the rails imo.

I went 6.0/10

Not gonna agree with critics every time and if I did then where is the fun in that?

 

[Juve]

I watched The First Omen yesterday. The original Omen is my favourite horror movie and possibly my favourite movie of all time. That said, I read the reviews. The movie was being praised left and right on IMDB and Reddit. I was looking forward to watching the prequel.

I watched the movie. The reviews baffled me, did these people watch the original Omen?

- The Father Brennan was squeaky clean in this movie. Not like in the original Omen where he was part of the plan to give Damien to Robert. He died trying to repent for his actions.

- In the original, Father Brennan tells Robert he was there when "it" gave birth. I guess they forgot in this prequel because he wasn't there

- Father Brennan also explains to Margeret, there are two churches. The other church created an anti-christ to bring people back people to church by causing fear. This is a dumb reason how to bring people back to church and it's the plot of the first movie. Damien was to be put in politics to be the future president. Also, if you look at the final movie, Damien was hell-bent on defeating the Nazarene and not bringing people back to church.

- The Orignal movie, Robert finds out Damien's birth mother is a Jackal. You see the jackal bones in the grave. In this movie she's not really a jackal and Satan or a vessel of Satan is the Jackal. It was some weird incest because you find out Margeret is not really just a normal young girl, she's a half anti-christ that they brought back to produce a male anti-christ with her father. I guess they are going to say she's a Jackal hybrid. Again, the mother was a full blown jackal and not a hybrid.

- In the original movie the jackal mom is dead. In this one, she's still alive and also gives birth to a twin. There was never a mention of a twin.

- Margaret the protagonist, manages to escape a fire with her Anti-Christ Carlita sister and her twin Anti-Christ daughter. Father Brennan approaches in the sticks to reveal all three hiding. Father Brennan warns them the Church will be looking for them. You witness the new Avengers team-up. I am assuming this is a setup for future movies?

- They hardly used the music from the original trilogy. The soundtrack from the original movies is absolutely fantastic.


It was an ok movie. It would have made a good horror movie if it was a standalone movie and not a prequel of The Omen. It did not feel like a prequel to The Omen. I was left disappointed.

I give it a 7/10 if it was a standalone. Since this is supposed to be a prequel, it get 3/10.

 

[CDJ]

Longlegs is getting some pretty incredible reviews from people who have caught early screenings.

CANNOT. f***ING. WAIT

 

[shadow1]

The Howling (1981) - 6/10

A troubled news anchor takes a therapeutic vacation, but discovers there is a werewolf at her destination.

Dee Wallace stars as Karen White, a news reporter who is being stalked by a serial killer. Following a traumatic incident, Karen's therapist (Patrick Macnee) recommends she take a vacation to a mountainside colony where he conducts treatment. While there, Karen and her husband Bill (Christopher Stone) find the residents to be strange but hospitable and try to settle in. However, Karen keeps hearing strange howling noises outside during the night, and is unsettled by a brutal attack on some local farm animals. Meanwhile, Karen's co-workers Chris (Dennis Dugan) and Terri (Belinda Balaski) investigate Karen's stalker, and find evidence he may be a werewolf...

The Howling was directed by Joe Dante and written by John Sayles. The film was based on a 1977 Gary Brander novel of the same name, though the plot strays heavily from the book. The Howling was one of three prominent werewolf films to be released in 1981, along with An American Werewolf in London and Wolfen. How does it fare?

It's pretty good, but is a case of style over substance. The opening act of the movie is strong, and feels like you're watching a crime thriller like Cobra (1986) rather than a horror movie. Act two then dives into the horror, and for a while divides the movie into an A & B plot. The "B" plot is about Chris and Terri doing investigative research about Karen's attacker, and they quickly come to the conclusion it must've been a werewolf. This part of the movie is meant to be a werewolf info dump for the audience, but I found myself really having to suspend my disbelief at how quickly these two readily accept that werewolves exist and are stalking their co-worker. They do so based on such little evidence, and though their conclusion is correct, I couldn't stop thinking about what huge leaps in logic they were making.

The meat of the movie is Karen and Bill at the mountainside resort ("A" plot). This plot line sets up two mysteries, but interestingly our characters are only aware of one of them. The one they're aware of is "who is stalking Karen?". She is using therapy to try to remember the stalker's face, and of course we as an audience can deduce it's going to be someone at the colony. The second mystery - which our characters are oblivious to but we're aware of due to the film's title - is "are all of the residents werewolves or only some of them?". Werewolf movies are perfect vehicles to set up mystery elements, but I'm sad to report the answer both of these questions is painfully obvious; so much so that it lowers the overall product in my opinion. Furthermore, when all the cards are laid out on the table, the motivations of certain character(s) make no sense and will make you question the entire film's set up.

Fortunately, The Howling is propped back up by the great special effects of Rob Bottin (who, of course, later worked on 1982's The Thing). The werewolves look excellent and elevate the rest of the movie, adding a certain level of class to a film that is somewhat generic otherwise. My only complaint here is the movie invests so heavily in its "mysteries" that it takes a while before we get to the werewolf action, and I wish there was more of it.

Overall, The Howling is a reasonably solid monster flick. Its plot is full of holes, but the film remains a cult classic due to its awesome werewolf effects. I have to give the movie credit for how well it uses its measly $1M budget; it never feels cheap, and the creature effects alone look like they cost twice its overall budget. I thought about giving it a "7" based solely on said effects, but I'm going to settle on "6" as I feel like there are too many things with the plot I can't move past (The Howling's 6.5 on IMDB is perfect). By the way, don't watch this movie's trailer - it spoils the ending. The Howling was a moderate success, earning $17.9M at the box office.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

The Howling (1981) - 6/10

A troubled news anchor takes a therapeutic vacation, but discovers there is a werewolf at her destination.

Dee Wallace stars as Karen White, a news reporter who is being stalked by a serial killer. Following a traumatic incident, Karen's therapist (Patrick Macnee) recommends she take a vacation to a mountainside colony where he conducts treatment. While there, Karen and her husband Bill (Christopher Stone) find the residents to be strange but hospitable and try to settle in. However, Karen keeps hearing strange howling noises outside during the night, and is unsettled by a brutal attack on some local farm animals. Meanwhile, Karen's co-workers Chris (Dennis Dugan) and Terri (Belinda Balaski) investigate Karen's stalker, and find evidence he may be a werewolf...

The Howling was directed by Joe Dante and written by John Sayles. The film was based on a 1977 Gary Brander novel of the same name, though the plot strays heavily from the book. The Howling was one of three prominent werewolf films to be released in 1981, along with An American Werewolf in London and Wolfen. How does it fare?

It's pretty good, but is a case of style over substance. The opening act of the movie is strong, and feels like you're watching a crime thriller like Cobra (1986) rather than a horror movie. Act two then dives into the horror, and for a while divides the movie into an A & B plot. The "B" plot is about Chris and Terri doing investigative research about Karen's attacker, and they quickly come to the conclusion it must've been a werewolf. This part of the movie is meant to be a werewolf info dump for the audience, but I found myself really having to suspend my disbelief at how quickly these two readily accept that werewolves exist and are stalking their co-worker. They do so based on such little evidence, and though their conclusion is correct, I couldn't stop thinking about what huge leaps in logic they were making.

The meat of the movie is Karen and Bill at the mountainside resort ("A" plot). This plot line sets up two mysteries, but interestingly our characters are only aware of one of them. The one they're aware of is "who is stalking Karen?". She is using therapy to try to remember the stalker's face, and of course we as an audience can deduce it's going to be someone at the colony. The second mystery - which our characters are oblivious to but we're aware of due to the film's title - is "are all of the residents werewolves or only some of them?". Werewolf movies are perfect vehicles to set up mystery elements, but I'm sad to report the answer both of these questions is painfully obvious; so much so that it lowers the overall product in my opinion. Furthermore, when all the cards are laid out on the table, the motivations of certain character(s) make no sense and will make you question the entire film's set up.

Fortunately, The Howling is propped back up by the great special effects of Rob Bottin (who, of course, later worked on 1982's The Thing). The werewolves look excellent and elevate the rest of the movie, adding a certain level of class to a film that is somewhat generic otherwise. My only complaint here is the movie invests so heavily in its "mysteries" that it takes a while before we get to the werewolf action, and I wish there was more of it.

Overall, The Howling is a reasonably solid monster flick. Its plot is full of holes, but the film remains a cult classic due to its awesome werewolf effects. I have to give the movie credit for how well it uses its measly $1M budget; it never feels cheap, and the creature effects alone look like they cost twice its overall budget. I thought about giving it a "7" based solely on said effects, but I'm going to settle on "6" as I feel like there are too many things with the plot I can't move past (The Howling's 6.5 on IMDB is perfect). By the way, don't watch this movie's trailer - it spoils the ending. The Howling was a moderate success, earning $17.9M at the box office.

Oh yes! I expect you to go through all movies now, and that should be more fun - at least for you - than the children.

I haven't seen this one is decades, but 6/10 seems about right for what I do remember. It mixes stuff too much and doesn't have a clear angle, but it does a lot of things right. The ending would have been superb with better creature effects (too bad, cause some of the other effects are great).

 

[shadow1]

Oh yes! I expect you to go through all movies now, and that should be more fun - at least for you - than the children.

I haven't seen this one is decades, but 6/10 seems about right for what I do remember. It mixes stuff too much and doesn't have a clear angle, but it does a lot of things right. The ending would have been superb with better creature effects (too bad, cause some of the other effects are great).

Yeah I'm hoping! I meant to start this series a while ago, but I've been sick as a dog (no pun intended) for two weeks now (still not fully recovered). The only movie I watched part of during that time - Predators (2010) - was causing me to have insomnia-fueled hallucinations, so I waited until I was in a better frame of mind before starting this series.

It is really hard to watch The Howling these days, at least in the USA. None of the usual suspects are streaming it, I can't find a digital copy to purchase anywhere, and it doesn't seem to be listed on the Shudder site. However, it was available on the Shudder Youtube account, so I burned my 7-day free trial to fire it up.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Yeah I'm hoping! I meant to start this series a while ago, but I've been sick as a dog (no pun intended) for two weeks now (still not fully recovered). The only movie I watched part of during that time - Predators (2010) - was causing me to have insomnia-fueled hallucinations, so I waited until I was in a better frame of mind before starting this series.

It is really hard to watch The Howling these days, at least in the USA. None of the usual suspects are streaming it, I can't find a digital copy to purchase anywhere, and it doesn't seem to be listed on the Shudder site. However, it was available on the Shudder Youtube account, so I burned my 7-day free trial to fire it up.

I'm usually pretty good to find rare films, but my usual spots sadly don't do much for commercial / popular flicks. Can't help you much. I think Howling II is (weirdly) available, but none of the following ones. I've seen up to part 6, and I somewhat remember part 4 was kind of weird (and bad). Didn't even know there was a reboot.

 

[shadow1]

Howling II: ...Your Sister Is a Werewolf (1985) - 4/10

A private investigator, cop, and reporter travel to Transylvania to battle a coven of werewolves.

Christopher Lee stars as Stefan, a mysterious investigator who has been tracking werewolf activity across the world. After a funeral in Los Angeles, Stefan shows proof to the deceased's brother - a police officer named Ben (Reb Brown) - that his sister was a werewolf. Along with reporter Jenny (Annie McEnroe), Stefan and Ben head to Transylvania to battle a werewolf queen named Stirba (Sybil Danning)...

Howling II was directed by Philip Mora, and written by Gary Brandner and Robert Sarno. As was the case with The Howling (1981), Howling II was based on a novel by Brandner ("Howling II"), but this time Brandner worked as screenwriter. The film faced financial issues during shooting, causing Brandner to make many re-writes on the fly as the production changed shooting locations frequently. Additionally, many of the werewolf effects needed to be added in post-production as a result of the budget issues. How does Howling II fare?

This is one bizarre movie. At its core, it's essentially a Dracula rip-off, but with the 80's vibe of Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II (1987). Christopher Lee plays a Van Helsing-esque character that knows everything about werewolves and the big bad Striba, while Ben and Jenny are essentially Arthur Holmwood-type characters. They both have some skin in the game, but for the most part are just foot soldiers joining Lee on his crusade.

And that's the biggest problem with this movie. Ben and Jenny get a ton of screen time separate from Lee, but they have nothing to do aside from lollygag in the streets of Europe. A lot of movies I watch have act two issues, but this is one of the most egregious cases I've ever seen. The characters are quite literally waiting around. They're not game planning, or trying to find some special weapon to take down Striba. When the third act rolls around, they pretty much just grab some guns and knives and go confront the werewolves with no real plan of attack. So, what are the characters doing all movie? Mostly having sex; antagonists and protagonists alike. I don't mind tasteful nudity... but these scenes are obnoxious, with hair covered half human/half werewolf people rolling around and making grunting noises.

Speaking of the werewolves... my god. I shouldn't even call them werewolves, because they're clearly gorillas! The movie tries to hide it by photographing them from long distances while they're obscured by shadows, but even then you can tell they rented some ape costumes and modified them. You pretty much never get a good look at the werewolves; the movie uses a lot of POV shots, as well as a lot of quick inserts of werewolf claws and snouts slashing or biting at someone.

The best look we get at a werewolf is a scene that remakes a classic scene from the original Howling (1981) movie. Due to studio red tape, they couldn't use the actual footage from the first movie and had to redo it. The scene in question in the first Howling movie was one of the rare times that film's special effects looked bad, so you can only imagine how atrocious things look here. The werewolf looks like a Party City version of Michael J. Fox in Teen Wolf (1985); it is unacceptably bad and hilarious. Oh yeah - the whole "get bitten by a werewolf, turn into a werewolf" isn't really a thing in this movie. The werewolves aren't really trying to expand their pack in this movie. They're mostly just doing bad things because... well, they're the antagonists.

In addition to the Dracula and Prom Night II vibes, this movie has some serious The Monster Club (1981) vibes going on as well. There is a new wave band in this movie called Babel that plays a song called "The Howling" early in the movie. (This club is supposedly in LA, but is literally the most European club humanly possibly). The song is pretty good, but it's the only song the band plays, and the film calls back to this footage like four times throughout the movie. It just adds to the weird campiness Howling II has going on.

Getting to the bottom line, is this movie good? Hell no. But it is shockingly watchable and entertaining enough to keep your attention. Sybil Danning's Striba villain is truly flat, with so many scenes of her sitting around making weird faces while some horrible special effects are on screen. On the flip side, Christopher Lee manages to add class and legitimacy to the film. Even when his character is saying the most ridiculous things, you can't help but buy into it because he's Christopher Lee. Remove Lee from the film and you're probably looking at a 2 starer.

Overall, Howling II: ...Your Sister Is a GorillaWerewolf is a strange, poorly written movie. Christopher Lee adds a ton of cachet, and the movie is shot really well. It doesn't look like a piece of junk, even though a lot of it is junk - especially the werewolves. Lee, who later appeared in Joe Dante's Gremlins 2 (1990), apologized to The Howling (1981) director for appearing in this movie. Howling II was made on a budget of $2M, but I could not find any earnings information.

 

[Osprey]

I feel bad that shadow1 is writing all of the reviews, so I'll force myself to review the two horror movies that I watched this past week.

Slaughter High (1986) - 5/10

High school kids play a prank on a nerd, sending him to the hospital, disfigured. 10 years later, they're all invited back to the school for a reunion, but guess who invited them and guess what his plans are. It's a slasher with no mystery and not much suspense, but it's lightly amusing and there are a few inventive kills. The best is when a guy is working under a tractor and the killer turns it on and lowers it, spinning blades and all, onto the guy. That's one way to do manscaping. The funniest is when a girl takes a bath to wash her dead friend's guts off of her (as if getting naked with a killer on the loose is smart, but it wouldn't be an 80s slasher without it) and acid comes pouring out of the faucet, but instead of simply getting out of the tub, she screams for 30 seconds until she's nothing but a skeleton. The movie also takes the trope of adults playing high school kids to the extreme, especially with 34-year-old Caroline Munro initially playing a character half her age. At least all of the overage casting makes a little more sense when the movie jumps forward 10 years. Something that makes the movie different is that it's a British slasher with an entirely British cast that puts on American accents. I didn't realize that while watching, but the acting did seem off. I thought that they were just bad. Well, they probably were that, too. Anyways, I can't say that I enjoyed it, but it was watchable. Oh, one more bit of interesting trivia: it was supposed to be named "April Fool's Day" until the filmmakers were beaten to the title by that other 1986 horror film.

Final Exam (1981) - 4/10

A killer hunts down jocks and nerds alike on a college campus during finals week. After opening with a murder, the movie spends an hour following students around as they go to class, play pranks, get hazed, steal tests and flirt with one another. It felt more like a generic college comedy than anything resembling a horror film. With about 20 minutes to go, it finally gets backs to the kills, though they're all rather tame. The only one that I liked was when a jock gets killed on the indoor basketball court and the scoreboard changes to "Guest 1 Home 0" . There's no mystery about what the killer looks like, no details about who he is and no motive for why he's killing college kids, which made him uninteresting. He stalks the kids like Michael Myers, to a soundtrack that sounds suspiciously like John Carpenter's, yet there's hardly any suspense. The director just doesn't seem to understand it or pacing, in general. Even when two kids are alone in a parked car at night and you know that they're about to be murdered, the scene goes on for far too long as they boringly discuss their relationship and debate having sex. It's really the middle hour that drags the movie down, though. I can appreciate what I assume was an attempt to add more character development than you typically see in slashers, but it didn't really help me to like the characters any more. I was just bored and still felt nothing when they died. Overall, this is a slasher that I just didn't find to be effective in any way. It just felt like an uninspired rip-off of Halloween and Friday the 13th, but without any backstory, suspense or gore.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I feel bad that shadow1 is writing all of the reviews, so I'll force myself to review the two horror movies I watched this past week.

Slaughter High (1986) - 5/10

High school kids play a prank on a nerd, sending him to the hospital, disfigured. 10 years later, they're all invited back to the school for a reunion, but guess who invited them and guess what his plans are. It's a slasher with no mystery and not much suspense, but it's lightly amusing and there are a few inventive kills. The best is when a guy is working under a tractor and the killer turns it on and lowers it, spinning blades and all, onto the guy. That's one way to do manscaping. The funniest is when a girl takes a bath to wash her dead friend's guts off of her (as if getting naked with a killer on the loose is smart, but it wouldn't be an 80s slasher without it) and acid comes pouring out of the faucet, but instead of simply getting out of the tub, she screams for 30 seconds until she's nothing but a skeleton. The movie also takes the trope of adults playing high school kids to the extreme, especially with 34-year-old Caroline Munro initially playing a character half her age. At least all of the overage casting makes a little more sense when the movie jumps forward 10 years. Something that makes the movie different is that it's a British slasher with an entirely British cast that puts on American accents. I didn't realize that while watching, but the acting did seem off. I thought that they were just bad. Well, they probably were that, too. Anyways, I can't say that I enjoyed it, but it was watchable. Oh, one more bit of interesting trivia: it was supposed to be named "April Fool's Day" until the filmmakers were beaten to the title by that other 1986 horror film.

Final Exam (1981) - 4/10

A killer hunts down jocks and nerds alike on a college campus during finals week. After opening with a murder, the movie spends an hour following students around as they go to class, play pranks, get hazed, steal tests and flirt with one another. It felt more like a generic college comedy than anything resembling a horror film. With about 20 minutes to go, it finally gets backs to the kills, though they're all rather tame. The only one that I liked was when a jock gets killed on the indoor basketball court and the scoreboard changes to "Guest 1 Home 0" . There's no mystery about what the killer looks like, no details about who is he and no motive for why he's killing college kids, which made him uninteresting. He stalks the kids like Michael Myers, to a soundtrack that sounds suspiciously like John Carpenter's, yet there's hardly any suspense. The director just doesn't seem to understand it or pacing, in general. Even when two kids are alone in a parked car at night and you know that they're about to be murdered, the scene goes on for far too long as they boringly discuss their relationship and debate having sex. It's really the middle hour that drags the movie down, though. I can appreciate what I assume was an attempt to add more character development than you typically see in slashers, but it didn't really help me to like the characters any more. I was just bored and still felt nothing when they died. Overall, this is a slasher that I just didn't find to be effective in any way. It just felt like an uninspired rip-off of Halloween and Friday the 13th, but without any backstory, suspense or gore.

I guess it's exam week for everybody.

The acid bath!!! Kallio, shadow and I all commented on this film before. Kallio didn't even mention the bath. Shadow did, but like it was just another silly decision in a horror film. It's not! Thanks for giving the props deserved to this anthology scene.

(from my old comment: Let's accept that someone might be dumb enough to wander alone and go for a bath while her friends are getting butchered, and why not accept that there's an actual bathtub in this abandoned school in the first place, but that the escaped lunatic actually predicted that someone would go for the bath, cleaned it and rigged it with acid? That's a stretch.)

 

[Osprey]

The acid bath!!! Kallio, shadow and I all commented on this film before. Kallio didn't even mention the bath. Shadow did, but like it was just another silly decision in a horror film. It's not! Thanks for giving the props deserved to this anthology scene.

I forgot that all of you reviewed it. I just read your posts. It seems like we all thought that it was a little below average, but with a few redeeming features, even if they were unintentional.

(from my old comment: Let's accept that someone might be dumb enough to wander alone and go for a bath while her friends are getting butchered, and why not accept that there's an actual bathtub in this abandoned school in the first place, but that the escaped lunatic actually predicted that someone would go for the bath, cleaned it and rigged it with acid? That's a stretch.)

Yeah, the scene makes no sense whatsoever, which just adds to making it funny.

 

[shadow1]

I feel bad that shadow1 is writing all of the reviews, so I'll force myself to review the two horror movies that I watched this past week.

Slaughter High (1986) - 5/10

High school kids play a prank on a nerd, sending him to the hospital, disfigured. 10 years later, they're all invited back to the school for a reunion, but guess who invited them and guess what his plans are. It's a slasher with no mystery and not much suspense, but it's lightly amusing and there are a few inventive kills. The best is when a guy is working under a tractor and the killer turns it on and lowers it, spinning blades and all, onto the guy. That's one way to do manscaping. The funniest is when a girl takes a bath to wash her dead friend's guts off of her (as if getting naked with a killer on the loose is smart, but it wouldn't be an 80s slasher without it) and acid comes pouring out of the faucet, but instead of simply getting out of the tub, she screams for 30 seconds until she's nothing but a skeleton. The movie also takes the trope of adults playing high school kids to the extreme, especially with 34-year-old Caroline Munro initially playing a character half her age. At least all of the overage casting makes a little more sense when the movie jumps forward 10 years. Something that makes the movie different is that it's a British slasher with an entirely British cast that puts on American accents. I didn't realize that while watching, but the acting did seem off. I thought that they were just bad. Well, they probably were that, too. Anyways, I can't say that I enjoyed it, but it was watchable. Oh, one more bit of interesting trivia: it was supposed to be named "April Fool's Day" until the filmmakers were beaten to the title by that other 1986 horror film.

Final Exam (1981) - 4/10

A killer hunts down jocks and nerds alike on a college campus during finals week. After opening with a murder, the movie spends an hour following students around as they go to class, play pranks, get hazed, steal tests and flirt with one another. It felt more like a generic college comedy than anything resembling a horror film. With about 20 minutes to go, it finally gets backs to the kills, though they're all rather tame. The only one that I liked was when a jock gets killed on the indoor basketball court and the scoreboard changes to "Guest 1 Home 0" . There's no mystery about what the killer looks like, no details about who he is and no motive for why he's killing college kids, which made him uninteresting. He stalks the kids like Michael Myers, to a soundtrack that sounds suspiciously like John Carpenter's, yet there's hardly any suspense. The director just doesn't seem to understand it or pacing, in general. Even when two kids are alone in a parked car at night and you know that they're about to be murdered, the scene goes on for far too long as they boringly discuss their relationship and debate having sex. It's really the middle hour that drags the movie down, though. I can appreciate what I assume was an attempt to add more character development than you typically see in slashers, but it didn't really help me to like the characters any more. I was just bored and still felt nothing when they died. Overall, this is a slasher that I just didn't find to be effective in any way. It just felt like an uninspired rip-off of Halloween and Friday the 13th, but without any backstory, suspense or gore.

I guess it's exam week for everybody.

The acid bath!!! Kallio, shadow and I all commented on this film before. Kallio didn't even mention the bath. Shadow did, but like it was just another silly decision in a horror film. It's not! Thanks for giving the props deserved to this anthology scene.

(from my old comment: Let's accept that someone might be dumb enough to wander alone and go for a bath while her friends are getting butchered, and why not accept that there's an actual bathtub in this abandoned school in the first place, but that the escaped lunatic actually predicted that someone would go for the bath, cleaned it and rigged it with acid? That's a stretch.)

Oh great, now this is going to be stuck in my head for the next week...

 

[shadow1]

Howling III: The Marsupials (1987) - 5/10

A professor searches for the existence of werewolves, while an outlander werewolf leaves her pack to join modern society.

Barry Otto stars as Harry, an Australian anthropologist who finds evidence of werewolves existing via an archival film from 1905. After news of a werewolf attack abroad, Harry tries to warn the US military, but they don't believe him. Meanwhile, Jerboa (Imogen Annesley) - a werewolf living in the outback - flees her home and arrives in Sydney, where she quickly meets an American filmmaker named Donny (Leigh Biolos), who casts her in a werewolf horror movie...

Howling III: The Marsupials was written and directed by Philip Mora. Mora, who directed Howling II (1985), was unhappy with the previous film's story and some of the changes producers made to make the film sleazier. To make amends, he wrote Howling III and as producer raised money for the film. How does it fare?

This is comfortably one of the weirdest movies I've ever seen. I usually don't do this, but I skimmed some Youtube reviews on this film because after finishing it, I was truly at a loss for words. I didn't find any answers in those reviews. And unsurprisingly, the scores are all over the place, with some calling it a hidden gem, and others giving it a 1/5. With seemingly no consensus, let me give my perspective.

Howling III is like a fever dream. It's almost like a shlocky horror movie version of Brazil (1985), or 12 Monkeys (1995), or some other Terry Gilliam movie. For the most part, it's a horror-comedy that borders on parody at times. The movie doesn't attempt to be scary at all, and has a ton of weird in-jokes that leave the whole film feeling surreal. I thought some of the comedy worked fine, but I'm not actually sure how accessible it is. Further adding to that surrealness is the film turns into a drama roughly an hour in. There was some comedy during this portion, but pivoting to slightly more grounded drama just added to the overall bizareness.

As far as the plot goes, it starts off very straightforward. The "A" plot has Harry and his team trying to confirm the existence of werewolves, while the "B" plot is a comedic love story between Jerboa and Donny. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the prominent Alfred Hitchcock parody character in the "B" plot. I'd be even more remiss if I didn't mention that Barry Otto (the actor who plays Harry) is in the Jackie Chan movie Mr. Nice Guy (1997), a film I watched a hundred million times growing up, so it was nice to see him in another role. Once these two plots merge, that's when things start getting weird. The film doesn't really have an antagonist - the werewolves are seen as sympathetic here - so we instead get a number of random and bizarre werewolf scenes to keep the body count going.

Speaking of the werewolves, they're worlds better than what we got in Howling II... but are worlds worse than what we got in The Howling (1981). I would say in general they're pretty cheesy; but we've seen worse, so beggars can't be choosers. I do want to highlight the film is fairly tame though, as this flick only earned a PG-13 rating in the USA. However, the film makes up for it with the use of very unusual camera work. Lots of POV shots, lots of fish eye lens use, and lots of odd camera angles.

Add it all up, and what do you get? A very niche film, that's what. Howling III has a horrible score on IMDB (3.5) and I can understand why. It's an alienating film, and I can guarantee no one who checks this movie out will be ready for what they're about to watch. Even moreso in my case - I drove nearly 600 miles over the weekend, popped in what I thought was a generic monster movie, and instead my exhausted brain was treated to an acid trip. However, if you can get invested in what the movie is going for, there is surreal enjoyment to be had. I could, and seemingly the Letterboxd users could too (2.4/5). It's still a flawed movie (as evidenced by my score) that meanders too much and has a ridiculous plot, but I think it has an unexplainable quality that makes it memorable.

Overall, Howling III: The Marsupials is a borderline indescribable movie. For me, it's so crazy I can't help but appreciate it. But for others, it may be the absolute bottom of the barrel. Howling III has a reported budget somewhere between $1M-$2M, but I could not find any earnings information.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Howling III: The Marsupials (1987) - 5/10

A professor searches for the existence of werewolves, while an outlander werewolf leaves her pack to join modern society.

Barry Otto stars as Harry, an Australian anthropologist who finds evidence of werewolves existing via an archival film from 1905. After news of a werewolf attack abroad, Harry tries to warn the US military, but they don't believe him. Meanwhile, Jerboa (Imogen Annesley) - a werewolf living in the outback - flees her home and arrives in Sydney, where she quickly meets an American filmmaker named Donny (Leigh Biolos), who casts her in a werewolf horror movie...

Howling III: The Marsupials was written and directed by Philip Mora. Mora, who directed Howling II (1985), was unhappy with the previous film's story and some of the changes producers made to make the film sleazier. To make amends, he wrote Howling III and as producer raised money for the film. How does it fare?

This is comfortably one of the weirdest movies I've ever seen. I usually don't do this, but I skimmed some Youtube reviews on this film because after finishing it, I was truly at a loss for words. I didn't find any answers in those reviews. And unsurprisingly, the scores are all over the place, with some calling it a hidden gem, and others giving it a 1/5. With seemingly no consensus, let me give my perspective.

Howling III is like a fever dream. It's almost like a shlocky horror movie version of Brazil (1985), or 12 Monkeys (1995), or some other Terry Gilliam movie. For the most part, it's a horror-comedy that borders on parody at times. The movie doesn't attempt to be scary at all, and has a ton of weird in-jokes that leave the whole film feeling surreal. I thought some of the comedy worked fine, but I'm not actually sure how accessible it is. Further adding to that surrealness is the film turns into a drama roughly an hour in. There was some comedy during this portion, but pivoting to slightly more grounded drama just added to the overall bizareness.

As far as the plot goes, it starts off very straightforward. The "A" plot has Harry and his team trying to confirm the existence of werewolves, while the "B" plot is a comedic love story between Jerboa and Donny. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the prominent Alfred Hitchcock parody character in the "B" plot. I'd be even more remiss if I didn't mention that Barry Otto (the actor who plays Harry) is in the Jackie Chan movie Mr. Nice Guy (1997), a film I watched a hundred million times growing up, so it was nice to see him in another role. Once these two plots merge, that's when things start getting weird. The film doesn't really have an antagonist - the werewolves are seen as sympathetic here - so we instead get a number of random and bizarre werewolf scenes to keep the body count going.

Speaking of the werewolves, they're worlds better than what we got in Howling II... but are worlds worse than what we got in The Howling (1981). I would say in general they're pretty cheesy; but we've seen worse, so beggars can't be choosers. I do want to highlight the film is fairly tame though, as this flick only earned a PG-13 rating in the USA. However, the film makes up for it with the use of very unusual camera work. Lots of POV shots, lots of fish eye lens use, and lots of odd camera angles.

Add it all up, and what do you get? A very niche film, that's what. Howling III has a horrible score on IMDB (3.5) and I can understand why. It's an alienating film, and I can guarantee no one who checks this movie out will be ready for what they're about to watch. Even moreso in my case - I drove nearly 600 miles over the weekend, popped in what I thought was a generic monster movie, and instead my exhausted brain was treated to an acid trip. However, if you can get invested in what the movie is going for, there is surreal enjoyment to be had. I could, and seemingly the Letterboxd users could too (2.4/5). It's still a flawed movie (as evidenced by my score) that meanders too much and has a ridiculous plot, but I think it has an unexplainable quality that makes it memorable.

Overall, Howling III: The Marsupials is a borderline indescribable movie. For me, it's so crazy I can't help but appreciate it. But for others, it may be the absolute bottom of the barrel. Howling III has a reported budget somewhere between $1M-$2M, but I could not find any earnings information.

Oh, that's the one I meant when I said part 4 was kind of weird! The marsupials! You're on the nail on this one, glad you enjoyed it, I certainly didn't!!

 

[shadow1]

Oh, that's the one I meant when I said part 4 was kind of weird! The marsupials! You're on the nail on this one, glad you enjoyed it, I certainly didn't!!

Yeah this movie is something else. If you sat there and wrote out the plot, it is clearly a piece of junk. But for me, the unusualness of the whole thing gave me some weird enjoyment from it.

The whole time I was watching this movie, I kept thinking of some hypothetical 1990's dad at Blockbuster saying "hey son, let's check out this werewolf movie!" only to watch scenes like this.

 

[Osprey]

The director was unhappy with how sleazy the previous movie was, so he made a PG-13 follow-up with an extended ballet scene? This man truly knows what horror fans want.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Amityville Death Toilet. I hate you @Pranzo Oltranzista

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Amityville Death Toilet. I hate you @Pranzo Oltranzista

From a pure execution and quality stand point it might be the worst movie I have ever seen.

I don't rate it quite that low because it is just bad and dumb. Has at least a small leg up on a few movies I've seen that are bad, dumb and repugnant.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Amityville Death Toilet. I hate you @Pranzo Oltranzista

As much as this review is absolutely perfect as it stands, I'd still appreciate your feedback!

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

From a pure execution and quality stand point it might be the worst movie I have ever seen.

I don't rate it quite that low because it is just bad and dumb. Has at least a small leg up on a few movies I've seen that are bad, dumb and repugnant.

As much as this review is absolutely perfect as it stands, I'd still appreciate your feedback!

What's really funny to me is I looked up folks involved in this after these posts and the producer is a dude named Ron Bonk who is the writer-director and writer of two movies I specifically thought of as being even worse than this and that I hate with every ounce of my being ... She Killls and The Night of Something Strange.

Genuinely did not expect that though perhaps I should have.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

You'v

What's really funny to me is I looked up folks involved in this after these posts and the producer is a dude named Ron Bonk who is the writer-director and writer of two movies I specifically thought of as being even worse than this and that I hate with every ounce of my being ... She Killls and The Night of Something Strange.

Genuinely did not expect that though perhaps I should have.

You've seen more crap than I have. That's something.

I still have no idea what's this film about, its themes and/or intentions. Nothing either about its aesthetics and its position in the Amityville universe. Might be a trap to get me to watch it. I'll be cautious. ;-)

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

You'v

You've seen more crap than I have. That's something.

I still have no idea what's this film about, its themes and/or intentions. Nothing either about its aesthetics and its position in the Amityville universe. Might be a trap to get me to watch it. I'll be cautious. ;-)

There's a semiotic read on the decline of American masculinity. All the toilet's victims are men. In fact I am not sure there is even a woman in this (and maybe that in itself is meaningful hmmmm....).

The toilet is the "throne" and who sits upon thrones? Kings. But our kings here are weak ineffectual fools caught unawares at their most vulnerable by a knife wielding toilet. That does not speak well on the modern American man.

Further it makes a clear statement about America itself. Amityville is supposed to be a sanctuary, a safe space, a world away from the real world (as Mayor Dump repeatedly notes it is almost vacation season). It's a matryoshka doll -- within America is Amityville and within Amityville is the home and within the home is the toilet. And that toilet is corrupted by evil. Nothing is safe. We are not safe.

And perhaps the most chilling thing is that it's a completely normal toilet. It's not like Satan's toilet or Charles Manson's. Ghost hunter Gregg G. Allin says it's a very common model. Nothing special. Very few things speak to America more than the mass produced commonality of home goods. What the film posits is that this will kill us all.

Amityville Death Toilet is sacred and profane.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

There's a semiotic read on the decline of American masculinity. All the toilet's victims are men. In fact I am not sure there is even a woman in this (and maybe that in itself is meaningful hmmmm....).

The toilet is the "throne" and who sits upon thrones? Kings. But our kings here are weak ineffectual fools caught unawares at their most vulnerable by a knife wielding toilet. That does not speak well on the modern American man.

Further it makes a clear statement about America itself. Amityville is supposed to be a sanctuary, a safe space, a world away from the real world (as Mayor Dump repeatedly notes it is almost vacation season). It's a matryoshka doll -- within America is Amityville and within Amityville is the home and within the home is the toilet. And that toilet is corrupted by evil. Nothing is safe. We are not safe.

And perhaps the most chilling thing is that it's a completely normal toilet. It's not like Satan's toilet or Charles Manson's. Ghost hunter Gregg G. Allin says it's a very common model. Nothing special. Very few things speak to America more than the mass produced commonality of home goods. What the film posits is that this will kill us all.

Amityville Death Toilet is sacred and profane.

This is my second favorite review ever (slightly behind your original one - and they complete each other perfectly). It kind of almost makes sense too. You got me, I'll watch it. Where can I find it?

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

This is my second favorite review ever (slightly behind your original one - and they complete each other perfectly). It kind of almost makes sense too. You got me, I'll watch it. Where can I find it?

It's on Tubi in the US.

I won't be held responsible for this.