You don't dig PROMETHEUS? Well, Father Gore does— so buckle up!
A Dangerous Method. 2011. Directed by David Cronenberg. Screenplay by Christopher Hampton, based on his play The Talking Cure.
Starring Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen, Michael Fassbender, Sarah Gadon, & Vincent Cassel. Telefilm Canada/Ontario Media Development Corporation/Corus Entertainment/eOne Films.
Rated 14A. 99 minutes.
I’ll say it loud and proud ’till the day I die: I am one of David Cronenberg’s biggest fans.
His films are incredible slices of human life twisted around the innovations of everything from technology to media to psychology, as well as all sorts of other themes and topics. While his earlier work is dominated mostly by the physiological, over the past decade or so Cronenberg has kept his eeriness as he’s moved towards examining aspects of the mind. Cronenberg first moved slightly from body horror in 2002 with the Ralph Fiennes-starring Spider, which examined the fractured mind of the titular character through years of psychological torment. Then came A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, both taking a look at the fluid identities of dangerous men involved in the world of organized crime.
But if the second act of Cronenberg’s career has shifted focus more towards psychology then the granddaddy of them all is A Dangerous Method.
Via screenplay written by Christopher Hampton – based on his own play The Talking Cure, which is also based on the book A Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein – the audience is transported into the relationship between groundbreaking psychiatrists Drs. Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, along with the presence of Sabina Spielrein, who went on to become one of the world’s first female psychoanalysts. The style Cronenberg brings here is his typically great eye for framing and an overall gift of storytelling. But more than that he takes his talents in the arena of body horror and manages to make the psychologically uneasy aspects of this story all the more affecting.
A few reviews I remember seeing when this was first released accused Knightley’s performance of being hammy, over-the-top, among other suggested negatives. There’s no way I can agree. In the initial scenes you can grasp the incredible emotional trauma of Sabina, as Knightley dives directly into this woman’s skin. It is a fearless performance from the top. Sabina was a hysteric, and that is how many of them are prone to behaving. Although her accent doesn’t always hit the perfect mark, her overall performance is solid. Her energy as an actress has always been good. Never more formidable than here.
The chemistry between Knightley and Fassbender is fiery, too. For his part, he brings Jung to the screen with an odd charm, one which slowly evaporates over the course of the film. At first he seems a proper man whose interests lie solely in psychiatry, unearthing new practices and honing old ones to modern methodologies and more modern issues/illnesses. Partway through there’s a gradual realization Jung is as repressed, if not more so in some ways, than some of the patients he treats. Through Fassbender we find Jung’s human side and also his hideous one. He seeps talent in every film in which he stars, this is no exception.
Finally, it’s the even more amazing chemistry between Fassbender and Mortensen that makes this film so engaging. Mortensen has a good look for Freud, as well as the fact he captures the air of the men well, right down to little details such as the constant cigar smoking, the pensive and animated conversation, his calm demeanour and way of speaking. He and Fassbender play well off one another – the former with a highly serious tone and set of mannerisms, the other a slightly more loose and freewheeling type. Together, as the tension rises from one conversation to the next, their performances reel us into a psychoanalytic world of ego, jealousy, competition. And their subtle touches as actors, along with the well written screenplay, gives them the ability to work without melodrama. These two together offer nothing but the best.
Jung: “Only the wounded physician can hope to heal”
Part of Jung’s resentment of Freud is that the latter seems to have no problem with sex. Maybe he’s not a ladies man either, yet he willingly dives headlong into sexuality as the root of just about every problem we as humans experience. Meanwhile, it is clear Jung had hangups, which emerged vividly in his relationship with Sabina. So Jung likely thought Freud’s preoccupation and fixation on sex was ill conceived simply because of his own desire to break free sexually, a.k.a cheat on his wife.
One major reason I love A Dangerous Method is because it takes a long, hard, raw look at people who are widely regarded as geniuses in the field of psychiatry. Of course anyone in the know realized Freud was into cocaine, as well as other bits and pieces of both his and Jung’s life. However, exposing the darkness underneath all the masterful work is something intriguing. In that way, Cronenberg further digs into the mind: the collective mind. As we try to believe doctors and other figures of such authority are often better than ourselves, we often forget they are simply human.
The conversations between Freud and Jung are wonderful, in acting and writing. Tension mounts as their opposing views bump up against one another, rubbing each other raw. Every conversation seems to get a little more anxious, each one has more attitude – often from Freud – and the relationship between these two great thinkers deteriorates, almost invisible to their own eyes as it’s happening. Then all of a sudden they’ve grown miles apart during the interim. The progression and downfall of their relationship is certainly precipitated by the affair Jung engages in with Sabina. But the inflated egos of both Freud and Jung lay the foundation for a breeding ground of contempt between them, an inescapable and unavoidable rift.
There are absolutely some flaws to this movie. The fact remains A Dangerous Method is a complex and interesting piece of cinema facilitated by the prodding mind of David Cronenberg. Without a focus on body horror, he puts a tight lens on the horrors of psychology. The dangerous method in question lays waste to the mental capacities and thought processes of Carl Jung, as it also taints Sigmund Freud and Sabina Spielrein. The famous Talking Cure is of course a great thing, one that’s given birth to what we know today as therapy, couples counselling, and so much more.
At the same time, the Talking Cure can lead to dangerous things if not taken by the reins. Someone like Jung, particularly in his affair and resulting mess involving Sabina, talked too much, and perhaps needed his own therapy while falling under the influence of first Freud, then Sabina in her own way, even Otto Gross and his ruminations on the uselessness of monogamy
This true story about the burgeoning days of modern psychiatry and psychoanalysis is a 4-star film with a trio of fabulous performances, the ultimate driving force behind its impact. Great directing, great acting, and a solid screenplay. If you have an interest in the topics at hand, check this out, but either way it is still a nice, interesting work of historical drama that gives us insight into the towering figures of Freud and Jung now that the past few decades have pulled further back the curtain on their personalities and personal lives.
Eden Lake. 2008. Directed & Written by James Watkins
Starring Kelly Reilly, Michael Fassbender, Tara Ellis, Jack O’Connell, Finn Atkins, Jumayn Hunter, Thomas Turgoose, James Burrows, Tom Gill, Lorraine Bruce, Shaun Dooley, James Gandhi, Bronson Webb, Lorraine Stanley, & Rachel Gleeves. Rollercoaster Films/Aramid Entertainment Fund.
Rated R. 91 minutes.
There are many city v. rural films out there in the thriller genre. From Deliverance to any number of backwoods horror movies, such as the Wrong Turn series and plenty others. But not all of those have the effect of James Watkins’ Eden Lake.
Before Michael Fassbender broke out big time and in the days prior to Kelly Reilly’s huge break, Watkins crafted an equally pulse pounding and disturbing horror-thriller with these two in the lead roles. Aided by a script with some sharp teeth, as well as the tense action which keeps the film’s pace quick, Eden Lake will linger with you afterwards. This one boasts a terrifying finish that lets you get no rest, no matter that the rest of the film is brutally intense and shocking.
However, there’s no shock for shock’s sake. Rather, we get a glimpse into the world of misled youths whose lives were likely influenced into running down the drain by their equally nasty parents. Not everything is completely tight in the screenplay from Watkins, but he makes up for those bits with interesting writing and two (or more) lumps of tragedy stirred in.
Heading into the bush for a weekend getaway, Steve (Michael Fassbender) takes his girlfriend Jenny (Kelly Reilly), a nursery school teacher, for some swimming and a bit of camping. They lounge on a nice freshwater beach enjoying the surroundings, the warm weather. After a little time, some young hooligans arrive with their loud music, their big dog, and start to make things less pleasant. Led by the crass Brett (Jack O’Connell), they get on Steve’s nerves, especially when the dog gets a little too close to Jenny. Soon the kids leave, then Jenny and Steve enjoy their time alone.
The next morning, turns out the kids broke a bottle and punctured one of Steve’s tires. He chases them in town after seeing them on their bikes, and later finds one of their houses. But this is only the beginning. When the couple encounters the crew again and the situation turns ugly, Brett’s dog is accidentally stabbed and killed by Steve, in self defense. This prompts an all-out war between the couple and the teenagers.
Steve and Jenny may not make it home from their trip after all.
The first thing we see in Eden Lake is Jenny at the school where she teaches. There are little innocent kids, who play child-like games, they laugh and fool around. Jenny’s obviously good with them, comfortable in her career. So to see everything get juxtaposed here with the situation not long after with the older kids is interesting. We go from little innocent children to big bad teenagers who, somewhere along the line from then to now, grew up from being kids into becoming full-fledged monsters. Also, I love the transformation Jenny undergoes as a meek, mild-mannered teacher who later is forced to become a warrior and survivor. Particularly – SPOILER ALERT – once Steve is dead, Jenny is left to her own devices. Even before he dies, she’s got to take care of herself, and him due to his awful injuries. There’s this long line of character development in a short time. Leading up to the serious confrontations, Jenny appears as quiet, reserved, someone who doesn’t want to rock the boat. The tragic events which unfold throughout the film mold her into someone fierce and assertive, and somebody not afraid to defend herself at all costs. For the handful of really dumb moves by Jenny and Steve, there are enough instances of well-written characters and the main parallel between Jenny’s occupation/where she ends up to justify Eden Lake as a solid thriller. Late in the film, Jenny is made to commit a terrible act – another one of self defense in this plot – but it is devastating, for us and for her. This is probably the pinnacle of the parallel in her character.
Even from the small supporting roles of the teenagers we get solid acting. Above them all stands Jack O’Connell. Recently he’s done amazing turns in films like Starred Up, but in 2008 this was a performance to watch. He is a terrible young man capable of extremely vicious violence, his personality a sick and turgid cesspool. The depth of depravity comes out, especially in a scene that comes just after the one-hour mark; his enjoyment is far too evident, which makes the character so powerfully menacing. This film could have had any number of young people take the role of Brett. With O’Connell, the performance is disturbing and forceful and you hate Brett to the core. Note: in the last moments with his character, you can almost see a twinkle of something in his eye, but largely I believe it’s not regret; it’s the same twinkle people like Ted Bundy and other killers would get in their eyes, holding back their real selves just behind it.
Fassbender does well with his role and it comes off naturally. Although, it is ultimately Reilly whose talent sells Eden Lake into its suspense. We’re often taken by the danger of a thriller when it’s a woman in danger, simply because she’s a woman, men are after her, et cetera. Yet Reilly brings a life to Jenny. Again, she’s a timid sort of lady, though, as time progresses this timidity wears off, and her battle-face shows. The vulnerability of her character always shines through, most scarily in the last scene. But she commands your attention to the presence of her character, and you truly feel for her every step of the way, despite some of the dumb choices (fault of writing; not her performance).
The ending still leaves me in shambles. Really puts the cap on things as far as determining whether or not the behaviour of the teenagers has been ingrained in them over time.
A 4 out of 5 star film, indeed. There are certainly a few spots where Watkins needed to tighten up some things, such as a few truly strange choices the characters made. But none of that ruins what is an effective, violent, and edgy thriller. This one will take you to the brink. Then, just when you’re sure the lead character and you have each had enough, Watkins piles it on to leave us with that grim taste in the mouth. Trust me. Eden Lake is a keeper, and if you can forgive a few blemishes this will really hit the spot if you’re looking for a horror-thriller to damage you.
Macbeth. 2015. Directed by Justin Kurzel. Screenplay by Jacob Koskoff, Michael Lesslie & Todd Louiso; based on the original play by William Shakespeare.
Starring Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Paddy Considine, Lochlann Harris, Lynn Kennedy, Seylan Baxter, Brian Nickels, Hilton McRae, James Harkness, Ross Anderson, David Thewlis, Sean Harris and Elizabeth Debicki.
See-Saw Films/DMC Film/ACE/Film 4/Creative Scotland/Studio Canal.
Rated 14A. 113 minutes.
You either love Shakespeare, or you haven’t got any time for him. That’s just the way it goes. I’ve never met anyone who says “Oh yeah I read a bit now and then”. You read Shakespeare plenty or don’t give a shit. Honestly. He’s one of those acquired tastes. I’ve always enjoyed his work because of the death, the mystery, intrigue, all the murder and deceit and disguises. Shakespeare wrote such wild and exotic stuff, it’s just hard to crack through some of his dialogue if you don’t study it. And that’s why I think you either love him or hate him. Bottom line.
Justin Kurzel came on with an amazing debut, Snowtown, which is based on the real serial killings of Australian murderer John Bunting. That was one macabre yet compelling films. It almost dulled the violence and atrocity to a point where, by the end, you’ve nearly become bored by it. Yet somehow the story, the people involved and those caught up in Bunting’s whirlwind of murderous impulse, it all keeps you interested. So here in Macbeth, there’s a certain aspect of the titular character which parallels that whirlwind feeling. Not in the same way. But the play is of course called Macbeth. We can’t forget about Lady Macbeth, whose power is almost without rival, as well. It’s the attention paid to the characters themselves, which Kurzel did so well in Snowtown, that makes this Shakespearean adaptation thrilling and worthy of respect. The look and feel of the entire film is amazing, the acting even better. But best of all is the resonance Shakespeare’s words still have today, on film, and how Kurzel manages to give us a wonderful take on the source material with a simultaneously beautiful and grimly captured vision of that fearsome Scottish play, so they say in the theatre.
Macbeth (Michael Fassbender), Thane of Glamis, receives a prophecy from a trio of witches, which tells him one day he will become the King of Scotland. Succumbing to his deadly ambition, his own manifest destiny, and driven to action by his equally power hungry wife Lady MacBeth (Marion Cotillard), he murders the current King, Duncan (David Thewlis).
However, after the deed is done Macbeth becomes wracked with paranoia, guilt, fear. He slowly starts to unravel, right from the beginning. Likewise, Lady Macbeth finds herself similarly plagued as her husband. Their murderous, power mad impulses don’t stop there. Later on, she takes to sleepwalking, a living effect of her and her husband’s crimes. Their lives become that of a King and Queen, but their climb to the throne is marred with blood and stained with betrayal.
The atmosphere of the film all around is incredibly well crafted. Immediately the battle scenes take you into a world torn by war. Those sequences are wrapped in fog, slow motion moments which wrap you up inside them before moving to a different, exciting shot. Another aspect of this film I loved: the editing. Specifically I thought the way they did the coronation scene was perfect. Macbeth switches back and forth between observing the people chanting for him and the night where he stabbed King Duncan to a bloody death in his bed; on top of that, Fassbender looks almost sickly already with paranoid guilt, which makes things all the more powerful. There are a ton of instances where editing provides us with that kind of impact. Editor Chris Dickens has done a few solid movies like Slumdog Millionaire, Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead, but I would say this is absolutely his best work to date.
Then there’s the combination of an epic score from composer Jed Kurzel, whose best work is found in Snowtown and Dead Europe, along with gorgeously captured cinematography by Adam Arkapaw who has done impressive things on True Detective, Top of the Lake, Lore, Snowtown and Animal Kingdom. I love how the cinematography captures both the exteriors so vividly and in a sort of morbid light, then all the interiors are in the depths of the darkness, only lit up rarely. Films always impress me when they seek a shadowy look and tone while also keeping that quality throughout, not just in the literally shadowy scenes. It isn’t easy, but Arkapaw has a talent for that quality.
These two elements together, beautifully composed shots with a grim tone and a score that goes from an ominous lull to a crashing roar, fuse into what becomes a shadowy nightmare of paranoia, guilty thoughts, and plenty of brutality. These are masters at work. Jed Kurzel’s music haunts us in certain scenes; always lurking, sometimes crashing down on our heads and ripping us from our moorings. The visuals Arkapaw help Justin Kurzel direct us through a heavy, brooding adaptation of Shakespeare.
Macbeth: “I am in blood, stepped in so far.”
I read a review recently that said Michael Fassbender was boring as Macbeth. Serious? The frailty, the fragile nature of the character which he brought forward is stunning. In similar fashion, Marion Cotillard also conveys the madness of Lady Macbeth so well. They’re each fitted for the role. I don’t see how Fassbender was boring, nor can I see anybody complaining about Cotillard. For his part, Macbeth comes across as violent, ruthless and full of mixed emotions, but he is essentially a puppet. Not saying Lady Macbeth is the root of all the problems, she didn’t literally make him kill Duncan. But Macbeth is not the strongest one. Lady Macbeth is. She has all the ambition, it simply has to flow through Macbeth himself. They’re both fragile, but Fassbender brings out the weakness of Macbeth strong and evident, which allows us to see the power of Lady Macbeth, relegated to the title of his wife. She is the one in charge, because she has to be. Macbeth is almost a statement on these war weary souls who live only to fight, to become King, to rule with power; they’re all fuelled by their ambition, but through a stronger outlet. Often, it is their significant other. For Macbeth, it is the Lady Macbeth who fuels his quest to power. They both do themselves in, she only started things out with their private talks. She feels the guilt just as much. If not more. Fassbender and Cotillard bring to live to well-worn stage characters, transforming them into dreadful, amazing film characters.
For me, a flawless adaptation of Shakespeare. It doesn’t have to have everything the original had because this is version of that Scottish play. But this 5-star film has Justin Kurzel directing the hell out every last frame, giving us a view into the paranoia and guilt of both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth with intensity, savagery at times. The entire film is a haunted portrait of madness. Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard are both engaging, as well as powerful in their own respect. And there’s also Paddy Considine of whom I’m a big fan, he brought his talent to the table here in an unsettling way.
Old scenes are given brand new life in this retelling of William Shakespeare’s (arguably) most famous work. The atmosphere and mood of the entire piece is so thick, so rich you could cut it through with a knife. Absolutely a Shakespearean adaptation worth seeing. Can’t wait to snatch this up on Blu ray.
Without going for too many of the obvious choices, I wanted to come up with another list of horror for the Halloween season.
Opting to go with anything from traditional zombies to the Romero zombie to infection films and so on, there should be something for everybody on this list. Maybe the more seasoned horror veterans out there have seen just about all of these. But I’m hoping those of you out there looking for a few good flicks to indulge during the lead-up to Halloween might get a good new scare for yourselves and find something new.
These aren’t in any kind of order, just in a list. I’m not saying these are all my favourites either, though, I’ll let you know which ones I love most.
Nightmare City (1980)
For a full review, click here.
This Umberto Lenzi classic is the genesis for fast zombies. It’s been said already – the remake of Romero’s Dawn of the Dead? Would never have been without Lenzi. Sure, someone would have made zombies fast in a cool way, but I still think Zack Snyder owes a ton to Lenzi’s film. There’s something about this one that will get you from the star. Immediately, there’s a sense of chaos, and then the streets are flowing the undead, moving at a face past, fighting the living.
When it comes to zombie films, fast or not, Nightmare City packs the goods. This is a real great movie to put on and watch with a few people or a big group, as you’ll be hooting and hollering at some of the undead action going down under direction of a master like Lenzi.
Day of the Dead (1985)
For a full review, click here.
It’s hard to pick a favourite out of George A. Romero’s films, even considering his others outside of the Dead films; The Crazies and Martin are both pretty excellent, more so the latter, and Creepshow is a wonderful collaboration between him and Stephen King.
But honestly, even above the two previously amazing films, Day of the Dead is my favourite of Romero’s zombie work. There’s something truly dystopian for me above this one. As always, the plot keeps things claustrophobic, even worse the characters are in an underground military base. The best, though, is Bub – Romero introduces a zombie who has essentially been taught, like a primitive human or an animal, to respond and do things more than just eat brains. And if you look at the progression of Romero’s zombie series, include Land of the Dead and how active the zombies become there, I find there’s a lot to enjoy. Plus, you get cool imagery, a great colour scheme as is always the case with Romero, and lots of zombie goodness.
City of the Living Dead (1980)
For a full review, click here.
Lucio Fulci will often turn up on any horror list I make. Not because I think his films are all the best made, though some I think are fucking incredible, but mostly it’s because Fulci swings for the fences on just about horror film he’s made.
In City of the Living Dead there are a bunch of practical horror effects which are going to blow your face off. While I don’t think this is one of Fulci’s best, I do feel it has some of his wildest blood and gore.
From throwing up internal organs, priests committing suicide and dead babies, to heads being torn apart or heads being subjected to power drills, this is one zombie flick you’ll most certainly want to watch around Halloween. Any time you look out and see kids roaming the streets on the 31st, it’s always creepy in a way. After this Fulci film, it might look even creepier.
Dead and Buried (1981)
From a screenplay by Ronald Shusett and Dan O’Bannon (particularly of Alien fame), Gary Sherman crafts a pretty unique and horrific film which you can definitely consider one of the living dead variety.
In a small New England town, Potter’s Bluff, visitors seem to be continually murdered and Sheriff Gillis (James Farentino) is trying to get to the bottom of it. Unaware the other townsfolk have an idea about what’s been happening, Gillis may or may not survive the events transpiring in his own little jurisdiction.
To say a whole lot more than the simple plot synopsis would do you, the viewer, a disservice. Ultimately I’ll say only this – Dead and Buried has a wonderfully dreadful atmosphere, like a bad nightmare torn out of The Twilight Zone, and there is a classic type of feel to the film which makes it feel almost at home amongst William Castle flicks and the Hammer Horror catalogue at times. Perfect for a bunch of friends, but it does have a nice plot so it isn’t only horror-tainment; it also has some horror teeth with a solid script, full of dread and terror.
Shock Waves (1977)/ Dead Snow (2009)/ Blood Creek (2009)
This is honestly a pretty gnarly triple feature. A lot of people would tell you Dead Snow is the only real great movie out of these three. Me? Oh, I’d disagree with that.
First, Shock Waves takes us to an island where Peter Cushing plays a former SS Commander out of Nazi Germany, in charge of a troop of aquatic zombies. There’s lots of madness on the island, lots of almost gothic-like stuff going on.
You can never go wrong with Cushing in a horror, for me anyways. He is classic. Here bringing some of that class to a Nazi zombie movie, a precursor to the next film – Dead Snow.
A newer Nazi zombie flick out of Norway, this one sees a group of friends on Easter vacation in the mountains at a cabin; unfortunately, they run afoul of some buried Nazi troops who are more than happy to unfreeze, come back from the dead, and lay siege to the cabin and the unsuspecting friends.
This is a happily, unapologetically gory film, tons of splatter, blood everywhere. But it’s not one of those types of horror movies where it starts to get boring, because who doesn’t want to see Nazis die? Only Nazis, one could imagine. So get your fill here with tons of nasty horror kills.
Next up is another Nazi horror, though, in a vastly different vein. Blood Creek, also known as Town Creek, did not make an impact in theatres on a limited release, it hasn’t particularly enthused a lot of others since. But I thought it was a nice bit of fun. Featuring Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and Superman himself Henry Cavill as brothers out for revenge, as well as an incredibly low key and make-up’d Michael Fassbender (of whom I’ve been a big fan for a while), this is mostly a good popcorn romp in the horror genre, with a nice dose of Nazis to boot. Fassbender plays a Nazi officer who was dispatched to track down ancient runes, eventually becoming a nearly immortal, terrible and undead monster whose entire being consists of consuming human blood, and other creepy, nasty, Nazi business. Don’t expect director Joel Schumacher to do anything hugely innovative, but throw this one on after the others to give a different spin on the Nazi living dead sub-genre.
I honestly recommend this as a triple feature. You would not regret it, especially if you’re looking for a group movie night!
[REC] (2007)/ [REC]2 (2009)
For a full review of [Rec], click here.
These are subtitled Spanish films, so those who don’t dig on that may want to move on. Though, I stress as I usually do: if you only watch English language movies, you’re not doing yourself as a filmgoer justice. Horror has some amazing stuff going on in other countries.
Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza take the found footage sub-genre and horrified audiences with their infection horror film [Rec] which takes us inside a fire station with a news crew, on a night when they’re called to an apartment building where all hell breaks loose; inside, an epidemic begins. The second film [Rec]2 begins straight after the events of the first, taking a GEO team inside the same apartment building in order to combat the infected humans that are beginning to swarm the entire building and threaten to turn the whole city into a massive horde of infection. But it turns out there aren’t only the interest of police and medical authorities at play, as the Vatican has their hand in things.
Both of these movies do found footage proper justice. So many of the low budget efforts in this sub-genre come out terrible, while only a small number are excellent and more importantly effective; these two movies are in the latter category. Amping up on suspense and tension, Balagueró and Plaza really grind home the terror from beginning to end. There’s a lot of scary moments and the zombies/infected are creepy as all hell! Love the blood and gore here, as well as the jump scares; I don’t often say that, but the jumps here aren’t cheap, they’re the result of good atmosphere and tension, as I mentioned before. Great movies. More for a solo viewing, or just a pair; you don’t need a crowd talking a bit here and there during these, ruins the mood. But you’d be wise to do a double feature viewing on these two movies – awesome continuity and you’ll get your fill of zombified mayhem.
Return of the Living Dead (1985)
More Dan O’Bannon, this time he’s directing.
Honestly, if you’re a horror-comedy fan (I’m actually not a huge one) and you don’t know or enjoy Return of the Living Dead, I don’t know what’s going on with you. I mean, this is just about the perfect marriage of zombie horror and hilariously foolish comedy. On top of all that, it’s slightly meta-fictional in a way.
After two bumbling meatballs end up releasing toxins from the government, which inspired Night of the Living Dead, the living dead begin to rise once more and the world is threatened by zombies walking the earth, tearing and eating human flesh, consuming all which stand in their way!
A classic entry in the zombie sub-genre of horror, this is not one to be missed. Great for a pair or a crew of people, you can never go wrong with this one. There is plenty of goofball comedy and lots of zombie nastiness to boot, not many as great as this out there.
The House by the Cemetery (1981)
For a full review, click here.
Lucio Fulci returns on the list! This time with a different take on the living dead horror movie.
When a new family movies into a house and begins discovering a bunch of unsettling, the house’s past lurches forward from the darkness and into the present.
Victorian era illegal surgery, zombified and rotten corpses, neck stabbings, slashed throats and decapitated heads – Fulci is in fine style here, a (pardon the pun) full-blooded horror.
This is a nasty one with plenty of the director’s signature style. You could also say this fulfills the haunted house quota, even though it’s more of a living dead horror, but still – lots to take in for an October evening, better yet on Halloween night.
Mutants (2009)/ Open Grave (2013)
Another double feature, slightly different; these aren’t exactly the same type of zombie/infected horror movies, though, I think a certain vein runs through the both of these gnarly flicks.
Mutants is a French film about an epidemic turning human beings into mutant-like creatures, basically zombies. The plot concerns a young couple, Marco and Sonia (who is pregnant), attempting to find refuge in a military base. But when Marco contracts the virus, Sonia has to defend herself against her husband, best friend and lover in order to try and survive; for herself and for their baby. So you get a mix of zombie horror, emotional and personal drama, as well as a good deal of horror-action throughout the film. A high intensity and at times downright scary epidemic film.
In a similar more personal sense, Open Grave starring Sharlto Copley examines the epidemic sub-genre of horror through the eyes of a man who wakes up, with no memory, in a pit of corpses, only to eventually come across a group of others who woke under similar circumstances.
I can’t say much else about the plot, and honestly saying that it’s an epidemic/zombie type movie is saying too much, but just know Open Grave packs a real good punch. Copley adds lots of authenticity to the film playing a very believable, real type character. But the screenplay itself is the strongest bit of the movie and drives everything, making this one of those horror films that’s really going to draw you and keep you interested, riveted from the top until the impressively tense finale.
These two movies would fit together in a great way for a double bill, I highly suggest you try these out even if on their own, though. Both a good and terrifying ride.
Night of the Comet (1984)
If you want an interesting, tongue-in-cheek style horror with comedy, then look no further: Night of the Comet is the film you’re searching out!
When a strange astral event involving a comet happens, much of humanity is devastated leaving two young ladies to deal with the few humans, madness, and zombies which remain.
A true classic ’80s movie, this one will satisfy a ton of criteria depending on what you want – there are zombie types, there is throwback music, there are funny women, and there is science fiction abound.
This is a lot of fun and I think it’s definitely a zombie movie, just in its own way. You’re not going to find a ton of gore or anything like that. This is first and foremost a retro comedy with horror and science fiction thrown in, but the post-apocalyptic landscape of Los Angeles and the living dead roaming the streets makes this a proper entry on this list.
The Signal (2007)
Honestly I don’t know how this movie hasn’t gotten huge. That’s all right, though. Some movies are meant for a cult classic status, in another 20 years this will find the proper appreciation, the kind it deserves.
The Signal takes place in several sections, taking place in a city after an epidemic occurs spurred on by the signals transmitting through radio waves and television sets, et cetera. One woman tries to make her way to meet a lover after her husband and everyone seem to go crazy from the signal. For her, it becomes an absolute struggle for survival. As her lover does his best to track her down across the devastated city, they both encounter their own trials and tribulations.
When I first saw this one I was blown away. The acting is solid, which helps put the plot over; notably, a favourite actor of mine A.J. Bowen does a spectacular job with a menacing character. Most of all it’s the mix of science fiction and horror I find real interesting. Lots of weird infected-zombie-like action happening, as the citizens of the city all start to just revert into animalistic, primitive men and women only concerned with fighting and killing the next person before they themselves are fought or killed. Scary stuff, but also there’s a good, organic love story built in which I enjoy – when the love stories are forced into horrors or thrillers, I find it so tiring, this one is primarily a romance honestly yet the horror/sci-fi becomes a huge part of it and makes this an epidemic sub-genre film, absolutely. You could do a lot worse than this one, it’s going to find a bigger audience as time goes by. Good one for two partners who want to watch something creepy while also wanting to watching something together: ideal for the pair who’ve got different tastes slightly. Something for everyone here with this romance-horror-science fiction hybrid.
Splinter (2008)/ The Battery (2012)
One last double feature for the horror hounds. This one is the ultimate indie horror tag team, two vastly different movies but very much innovative and lots of fun in their own respect.
To start is the 2008 Splinter – a couple find themselves trapped in a gas station with an escaping criminal, all trying to find off a virus which splinters the bones and insides of its victims, contorting them into awful, terrifying shapes.
This one is nasty and also has great drama going on. The splinter parasite/virus was so intriguing, adding something fresh to the zombie/living dead sub-genre. A fantastic indie film you really have to see.
Then, you’ll need to throw on The Battery, another hugely satisfying indie horror with a premise not always tackled. While still in a zombie apocalypse, this film goes for a much more microcosmic view of the dystopian-horror landscape: two former baseball players try and make their way through the living dead infested countryside of New England, each with their own grating personality to test the other’s patience. This one also has tons of nice drama, while it continually pushes into the zombie sub-genre with good use of the deadheads in the background. First and foremost, you find yourself interested immensely with the relationship between these two men trying to survive in the post-apocalyptic, zombie world. Second, the zombies, the death and the loneliness of the epidemic stricken world all makes this a worthwhile horror.
Two awesome indie horror movies which fit together real nice! A good double bill, fit for a solo viewing or with a friend. These will suck you in and keep you interested with that indie screenwriting, but you’re going to get a nice swift helping of horror to ring in Halloween right here!
Pet Sematary (1989)
Not all of Stephen King’s wonderful stories end up translated onto the screen appropriately. I’m a huge fan of his writing, yet there’s always problems with the films adapted into film from his work.
Pet Sematary, for me, does not fall into the category of problem films. Some others say differently, I’m pretty sure even King himself isn’t a real fan at all, but this one did a number on me, still does each time I see it again. Of course there are parts that could’ve obviously been better executed (maybe this would be fitting for a remake nowadays other than the endless films being remade which don’t need to be). Still, bottom line is that this horror is actually horrific; its tension is there, the atmosphere of dread pervades almost each solitary scene to which we’re treated, and some of the imagery is truly scary.
One scene in particular, involving the wife’s now dead sister, still scars me to this day. Even when I think about it (she’s in the bed forgotten in a room of their house calling out for help; she looks hideous like a person twisted into a monster), the hair raises on the back of my neck. And the rest of the film is pretty chilling, to say the least. Ignore a few of the flaws and you’ll find yourself taken away into a land of terror. The living dead angle of Pet Sematary is another much more personal, intimate take on the whole sub-genre, in a way only Stephen King can tap into so emotionally. Not all of his original novel makes it through in translation, though, I can’t say there’s any missing horror.
Here’s to hoping you’ve enjoyed some of these films before, or that you discovered them here/somewhere else similar and now have come to love them the way I do!
Cheers to a good October and I’m going to have myself an epic movie marathon over the last week leading up to Halloween. Check back for more lists and movie reviews as we get closer to that beloved devilish night of candy, fun, horror and mayhem.