Atomic Fangirl

Story:  Just a guy.  Standing over a girl.  Trying to bite her neck.  Sounds like Dracula?  Of course not!  *pauses*  Why, do you think they’ll sue?

Scares: Surprisingly effective for a silent film.  Echoes of my earlier review of The Mummy?  Well that’s not surprising; these babies are classics, and for damn good reasons.  Excellent lighting, set design and directing included.

Splat factor:  It’s 1922 y’all.  Nup.  Fangs were scary enough back then.  And  Max Schreck still delivers.

Closing scene “shocker”: Not at all.  Unless you count (heh heh) the way our plucky heroine Ellen saves the day.  Genius!  Rather severe, but genius!

Remake, Sequel or OG (Original Ghoul):  It’s totally ripped off from Bram Stoker’s Dracula (yeah, in case you missed that), but Nosferatu is considered a classic on it’s own merits.

Trick or Treat?:  An oldie but a goodie!  Don’t let the silent-ness get you spooked in a bad way; Nosferatu is amazing.  It’s been almost a hundred years since this film came out, and it still has the power to grab an audience and hold on tight.  Director John Malkovich F. W. Murnau (Sunrise, Faust) is a master of imagery, even among his peers who only had visions to convey their message.  C’mon; the ol’ “shadow coming up the stair” thing is spooky-cool even today.

Tell me I’m lying. (image: Wikipedia)

Nosferatu is available just about anywhere, thanks to the whole Public Domain thing (um, at least in the USA. Some of you folks across the water may be forced to buy it or rent it.  But totes worth it.)  See it.  Not only will you get to indulge in some grade A horror, you’ll have your snobby “cinema” pals nodding about your good taste.  Which should be good for getting a beer out of them, at the least.

Score:  out of 5 pumpkins.

Story: College! Sororities! Pledge Week! Somebody died during a hazing ceremony last year! Oops. I’m sure her ghost won’t come back for revenge on the four Sisters that covered it up….

Scares: A few fun jumpy moments, and the death of one of the Sisters is surprisingly well done for a TV movie.

Splat factor: This was originally a Lifetime movie. So zero.

Closing scene “shocker”: It wishes. Seriously, I think the ending was supposed to be a shock, but ended up Sad Trombone.

Remake, Sequel or OG (Original Ghoul): Though I thought it was a remake of Sorority Row, this is an original.

Trick or Treat?: A movie equivalent of comfort food; this film may have a vibe that harks back to all the other Sorority horror movies, and have a whodunit that’s blatantly obvious as soon as you get the back story, but it’s easy to watch and is easy to sink into.

Really, really low budget, even for a TV movie. For “the most prestigious Sorority in the country”, there doesn’t seem to be a single member in the house except for the pledges and the 4 conspirators. Hello…?

Leighton Meister is very good as Sam, the new pledge that begins to suspect sinister forces. The Other Sisters and pledges are kind of throwaway roles for the most part, including the conspirators. Sam’s high school boyfriend is kind of a douche; you know, the kind that’s too young and insecure to be thoroughly pompous yet? Yeah. Needless to say I was rooting for the ghost to bring him down.

Score: 

Story: I’m broke – I know, I’ll throw a huge Halloween party! But my partner stole the take and I got fined by the po-po because I never got a permit. And now I just got bit by a skeleton in this house that’s known for demon summoning parties back in the day. I’m sure my friends and I have nothing to worry about. Hey, why are we locked in? Oh who cares, I’m feeling woozy….

Scares: A fair amount, but mostly of the gross-out, wincing variety.

Splat factor: Tons. It’s gross level is at 11. Plus, I’ll never think of doggy-style (or lipstick, for that matter) in quite the same way.

Closing scene “shocker”: No! Even though new millennium horror films seemed required by law to trot one out! Awesome!

Remake, Sequel or OG (Original Ghoul): A remake/re-imagining of the 1988 film of the same name. A sequel was in the works, but it never hit it’s Kickstarter funding level.  Probably best.

Trick or Treat?: An 80s throwback that holds to the old rules of the genre? I’m loving that attention to detail, and the film’s gung-ho attitude goes far toward keeping me interested. The actors are also game for the ride, especially Shannon Elizabeth as possessed party planner Angela.  Plus, the FX is suitably horrifying in an over the top kinda way.

The music is groovy too, with Type O Negative lending a hand during a dance scene that gets demonic. It’s a perfect fit. A scary bit that wasn’t intentional is Edward Furlong, who looks tired, burnt-out and just sad. But then the gory action cranks up and I was back in.  Fans of 80s horror should keep their eyes peeled for a cameo by scream queen Linnea Quigley in a ballerina costume.  You’re welcome.

There are one or two surprisingly smart twists to the typical clichés, and the non-doofus way of thinking by the handful of survivor hopefuls gets a thumbs up. If, like me, you like your horror to echo old Medieval morality plays, you’re in for a dripping, gruesome Treat.  You may just want to stick to Chap Stick for awhile afterwards though.  A little FYI from me to you.

Score:  out of 5 pumpkins

Story: Lucille Bluth was a controlling psycho even in the 70s. Case in point? Here she calls herself Evelyn Draper and stalks a DJ until he sleeps with her. She gets crazier and crazier until he cuts her off. Think that’s gonna stop her? Bingo!

Scares: Evelyn is one creepy chick, and as her psychosis grows so do the chills. Though I’m guessing that if you’re a guy? This is seriously scary shit.

Splat factor: More thriller than flat-out horror, this movie doesn’t have much blood.

Closing scene “shocker”: Nup.  It’s 1971, and endings are endings.

Remake, Sequel or OG (Original Ghoul): This is Clint Eastwood’s first time directing a movie, and it’s a one and only.

Trick or Treat?: Something that everyone says is good that actually is good? Hell-o! I’d heard about this film from many horror fans, and it’s been touted as a successor to Psycho. But I hadn’t seen it yet. And more than a successor to the great Norman Bates, Evelyn (and this film) remind me more of Alex Forrest in Fatal Attraction. Play Misty For Me is a horror film in that niche; real world spooky. It’s effective as hell, and definitely should be on your watch list if you haven’t seen it yet.  It’s choppy in a few places, and the editing during the climax is so quick that it’s one big spin, but all in all the film holds up, and is a definite classic in the genre.

Eastwood doesn’t shy away from a gorgeous shot of Carmel, CA; it’s a mini travelogue. Thank you, Clint. Donna “Knots Landing” Mills as Clint’s former-maybe-on-again girlfriend is crazy young – I almost didn’t recognize her – and rocks a Klute hairdo like nobody else. (Sorry, Jane Fonda.)  Which reminds me, some of the 70s styles the characters are sportin’ are terrifying in and of themselves.

Play Misty For Me shows that Eastwood knows how to do suspense just as well as straight drama. Here’s hoping he’ll do another one. Hey, a gal can hope. Y’know, as long as you don’t get all psycho about it….

Score:  out of 5 pumpkins.