200 Items Or Less: Blade Runner (1982)

A few thoughts: What can really be said about Blade Runner that wouldn't have already been said 1000 times? Funny enough, that statement has probably been said 1000 times itself when it comes to this movie. It's pretty much a perfect blend of sci-fi and noir, a moody and atmospheric film filled with incredible visuals (the effects and the lighting/cinematography), haunting sound design, and enough moral ambiguity to choke 6 goats and a mule. Don't ask me what that means. While the visuals, story, setting, and every other technical aspect is pretty much flawless, the real highlight of this movie for me is Rutger Hauer's intense performance as Roy Batty. That man has presence out the wazoo. While the rest of the cast perform admirably, this is Hauer's chance to kick ass as one of the most memorable villains of the '80s...eh, screw it, of all-time. Again, I can't add anything to the discussion here. It's one of the best movies of the 1980s by most people's standards, and a masterpiece of science fiction.

200 Items Or Less: The Raven (1935)

A few thoughts: One of several Lugosi/Karloff team-ups, this being the sole film of the bunch where Lugosi legitimately one-ups Karloff both in terms of being a more interesting character and a better performance. "Suggested" by Poe's famed poem, this movie is all about an evil doctor who saves a woman's life and jealously wants to keep her to himself. Riddled with fun over-the-top moments, pretty passable effects and set design, and a whole heap of nonsensical plotting issues, I can't say this is their [Karloff and Lugosi] best ever shared film, but is still clearly higher up on that list than the likes of 'Black Friday' and 'The Invisible Ray'. Whether you care for Lugosi or not, he is the highlight here, giving an exaggerate and deliciously evil performance that really affords him the opportunity to go all-out. Pretty much everything else is either forgettable, passable, or just not worth noting. Don't watch this alongside 'The Black Cat' -- it pales by comparison.

200 Items Or Less: The Haunted Castle (1897)

A few thoughts: Considered by many to be the first ever horror film, and this being its 120th anniversary, now seemed like an appropriate time to watch this one again. At only 3 minutes long, a whole tons of craziness happens here, objects and characters appearing and disappearing, sometimes in a puff of smoke. Thanks to Georges Melies' technical wizardry, the single frame setting never feels empty or boring, with action of all sorts taking up the screen with little hesitation. While it's definitely difficult to rank this alongside most other horror films (or films of any kind, for that matter), the strange impact this as well as many other Melies films has had on horror and film as a whole is hard to ignore. The effects, while rudimentary and crude by today's standards were undoubtedly pure magic at the time, and the imagination and effort put into something like this is clear as day. Maybe people won't look at this as some masterful film, but for what it is and how fun it still is to watch, I can't say I'd ever tell anyone to ignore it.

200 Items Or Less: Day Of The Dead (1985)

A few thoughts: The third film in George A. Romero's Dead series, and one of several truly great zombie movies of 1985. With some truly incredible practical effects work and a decidedly dreary tone, this movie manages to establish itself as a unique and tonally individual film in the series, mostly abandoning the more comedic nature of its predecessor 'Dawn Of The Dead' in favor of something very dark and intense. Showing the characters in constant conflict with one another, it follows in the tradition of letting the zombies fill out the background of even greater internal struggles amongst the main cast. Bub, the zombie, gets to steal the spotlight near the end as one of the greatest film zombies of all-time. The way they allow zombies to slowly start learning is a cool touch, and how they handled Bub is terrific. Yes, this is one of the most unpleasant zombie movies around, but the effects by Tom Savini are so disgustingly great, and the characters are so believable, I can't help but to appreciate it. The last great film in the series.

200 Items Or Less: Don't Torture A Duckling (1972)

A few thoughts: One of Lucio Fulci's most memorable films, in spite of the fact that few people are familiar with it. My girlfriend, being the Italian horror junkie that she is, had me watch this one, and while I definitely have some problems with the dubbing, weird cinematography, and inconsistent tone, this is easily one of Fulci's more watchable efforts that I've seen. Sadly, this movie didn't allow for him to show off much of the practical effects work he's known for, the story and mystery surrounding the killings more than make up for the relatively subdued gore. It's still a very violent and occasionally shocking film, but it doesn't get gratuitous with it very often, making it a lot more easy to sit through than something like 'Zombie' or 'The New York Ripper', both of which have some very...difficult moments. This isn't a genius film but it's well-constructed, rounded, and has some solid character development (in spite of the weak acting) for a film of this genre. It's not one of the absolute best giallos out there, but it's still worth watching.

200 Items Or Less: Embodiment Of Evil (2008)

A few thoughts: The third (kinda) and final (?) Coffin Joe film, set 40 years after the events of the previous entry, we find Joe released prematurely from a hospital for the criminally insane, only to go right back to his old ways. The problem, though, is that unlike the other films, he seems to be indiscriminately torturing people now without much purpose. You can tell after moving up from black and white to color after all this time, Marins was excited to get to have some really grisly torture and mutilation, and in focusing so heavily on that particular aspect, totally forgot that the story and characters should always come first. The result is a decidedly unpleasant experience full of creative but ultimately just disgusting torture scenes surrounded by a relatively non-existent plot and virtually zero characterization. I was impressed to start, but after a (very short) while I found myself incredible fatigued by it. This is torture porn, and unashamedly so. Zero atmosphere, zero thrills. A disappointing letdown.

200 Items Or Less: The Mangler (1995)

A few thoughts: Wow, what a surprise. I bought this for a few bucks because I wanted to see some more Robert Englund movies fully expecting it to be pretty lousy (as most critics call it) but, well, I really enjoyed this. Everything about the whole visual style is terrific, from the crazy lighting and cinematography to the grubby setting. It's a weird combination, having the movie look so pretty and so ugly at the same time. As for the story, well, you can definitely tell it's based on a Stephen King short. It is pretty ridiculous, but not letting the giant washing machine(!!!) be the only villain was a good choice, as it gave plenty of opportunity for Englund to evil it up. He's such a cartoonist villain, it's impossible not to enjoy him. Ted Levine is solid as the lead, a character who very much feels lived in and imperfect. It works out really well. Maybe it's not a mindblowing horror movie, but it's one of my more favorite Hooper films, and the sense of humor really sells it during the less gory moments.

200 Items Or Less: A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)

A few thoughts: I've already written about the first 6 of these movies (in a manner), and it should go without saying that I really, really like it, but here's the obligatory write-up anyway. In spite of the fact that I wasn't a huge fan of this movie the first time I saw it, over time I have come to appreciate the crap out of it and find it consistently enjoyable to watch. Robert Englund started out in this series mostly serious, which sort of works here since the tone was considerably less over-the-top and funny as it was later on, but he's so iconic and perfect for the role, I can't see anyone complaining. A lot of the effects still look pretty great, and the ones that don't hold up are still fun to look at. There's a whole heap of atmosphere (love the lighting!), the music is great, and a perfect blend of fantasy and horror elements that really helped define the genre. I wouldn't call this a perfect movie, but it's one I always enjoy and find myself coming back to again and again. It's worth it even if just for the blood gushing from the bed scene. Classic.

200 Items Or Less: The Old Dark House (1932)

A few thoughts: One of the defining "old dark house" films (shocking, I know), and one of only 4 horror movies ever directed by James Whale -- the others being Frankenstein, Bride Of Frankenstein, and The Invisible Man. While it clearly doesn't hold up to those other three, this is still one of the more entertaining films of the early '30s. With a massive cast of strange and/or creepy characters, the movie rarely feels dull or unengaging while introducing us to these weirdos. Sadly, even at only 72~ minutes, there are moments near the film's midway point (after most of the film's characters have already shown up) where things begin to stagnate. Luckily, a few decisions are made near the end that help rack up the tension, and the whole thing comes together nicely surrounding the wholly unsettling performance by Brember Wills. The setting and overall look of the movie is great, the cast does a wonderful job, and though it drags a little in the middle, it's still a great way to spend 70 minutes.

200 Items Or Less: The Hitcher (1986)

A few thoughts: Held back by one of the most insanely stupid lead characters in the history of the horror genre (which is saying something), but elevated by some of Rutger Hauer's best work, this is a cat and mouse slasher road movie with plenty of action, blood, and a wonderful western setting. While it's super easy to criticize the main character and all of his decidedly dumb choices from beginning to end, this movie can be forgiven for the fact that in critical situations, people do tend to behave strangely. But this aside, there really is a lot to love about this movie -- and I'm not just talking about the wonderfully creepy and quietly intense villain. The desolate open roads and western crime atmosphere set it far apart from most other slasher/stalker films, and the unexpected nature of many of the kills lead to a few genuinely surprising moments. Finding the balance between horror and action, this movie succeeds as both even when the writing puts the characters in unlikely and ridiculous scenarios. This is Hauer's show.

200 Items Or Less: Bloody Pit Of Horror (1965)

A few thoughts: Luckily I knew what I was getting into before I started this one, otherwise we very well might have an 'F' on our hands. As it stands, this is merely a pretty lousy movie with some unintentional humor and a good deal of delightfully over-the-top torture devices that are never believable enough to be even remotely scary. Storywise, I wouldn't even be able to tell you what this was about because it honestly stopped being interesting to me pretty fast. Bad acting and writing took over immediately, but I was reinvigorated during the second half, where bloody torture started to occur. While the movie does take its time to get here, some of the goofiness found in the latter half makes it worth sitting through to an extent, but only because of how stupid it all is. There's a particularly bizarre device that involves a giant fake spider, a web, and a bunch of arrows. It makes very little sense, but it's sort of fun to watch. It's too slow and dumb for its own good, sucks as a horror movie, but is campy enough to be mildly amusing.

200 Items Or Less: The Lost Boys (1987)

A few thoughts: After rewatching 'Near Dark', it was only natural for this to be one of the next movies for me to see. Easily one of the most entertaining vampire movies ever made, riddled with all the campiness and hilarious one could expect from Schumacher in his prime. Everything about this movie is calculated greatness, from the crazy hair and fashion, to the vamp faces and flashy action scenes. Though I find it hard to call this a horror movie, if the label fits I would have to consider it one of my favorites of the 1980s. The sort-of theme by Gerard McMann (cryyyyy little sistahh!) is one of my favorite movie songs, too, so the movie succeeds in that way as well. I'm not going to pretend this is a perfect movie by any means, but I've seen it a dozen times and it's never less than entertaining. I enjoy the cast, the levity, the setting, the style...it's one of many great cult films of the 1980s, and for me it's easy to see why. It's never boring, it's well-paced, and just overall a lot of fun.

200 Items Or Less: Haxan (1922)

A few thoughts: A thoroughly unique experience, this psuedo-documentary about witchcraft tackles various scenarios with actors playing them out, many of which involving witches (of course), witch hunts, and the Devil himself. It's a visual masterpiece with some of the most incredible sets, costumes, and overall production I've ever seen in a silent film, rivaled only by 'Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari' and other similarly striking movies. Though the film doesn't have an overarching narrative, the way the film is laid out gives it plenty of opportunity to tell stories while also handling larger themes -- sort of like an anthologized 'Reefer Madness'...but good. While it's definitely a hard movie to sit through at times, the experience is incredibly memorable, and anyone with any interest in witchcraft from a historical perspective should consider this essential viewing. As far as silent horror goes, it's in a category of its own. This film is dripping in atmosphere and can't be compared to nearly anything else, past or present.

200 Items Or Less: Creepshow (1982)

A few thoughts: A horror anthology with 5 short stories and an overarching one, all of which written by Stephen King and directed by George A. Romero. Normally I wouldn't feel the need to point out the fact that a movie has only one writer and director, but with an anthology, this is definitely something I see value in. Though not all 5 of these stories are equal in terms of quality, the production of each are fairly equivalent. There's a childlike nature to most of these segments, even though the film is rated R, which is very much a Stephen King-like thing. I love the lighting found throughout this movie, utilizing very Italian style visuals reminiscent of Bava, and the cinematography is pretty wonderful as well. With especially memorable performances by Hal Holbrook and a particularly sinister Leslie Nielsen. It's uncommon seeing Nielsen playing a non-comedic role like this, and he does it remarkably well. It's overall a pretty silly movie, but a good deal of fun, even if tonally it is a bit strange.

200 Items Or Less: The Pit And The Pendulum (1961)

A few thoughts: One of the first of the wonderful Corman/Price Poe adaptations, and also one of the best. Sort of a midway point for Price's performances in 'House Of Usher' and 'The Masque Of The Red Death', this time getting to play both the nebbish "victim" as well as a deranged killer, which is a good blend for him, even if I prefer when he goes full evil. Just like the rest of this unofficial series of films, the visuals (set and costume design, cinematography, all that fun stuff) are terrific and make up a good part of the appeal. Storywise, I don't really think this is an actual adaptation of the Poe story, but who really cares? As far as Corman goes, this is right near the top of the list, several steps above most of the pulpy trash he made at the time. This is a pretty big and impressive production, a well-lit and beautiful looking gothic castle serving as the setting throughout. Though it's not as sinister as 'Masque' or as haunting as 'Usher', there's still a lot to love here, and as far as '60s horror goes, it is among my favorites.

200 Items Or Less: Time After Time (1979)

A few thoughts: Being a fan of sci/fi, fantasy, and horror, I knew upon reading the plot description of this movie that it was one I was going to have to see. H.G. Wells has to chase Jack The Ripper through time (on his time machine, of course) in order to stop him from killing in the future? Well that's a just the kind of craziness I prefer! Sadly, after the initial buzz wears off, there isn't much left of this movie to keep it afloat. Despite Malcolm McDowell and David Warner's best efforts, their characters never quite take off, and the relatively generic paths the story takes by the third act keep it from ever hitting its stride and rising to meet its potential. While I have to say I was slightly letdown, there is still a lot of fun to be had with this movie, and like I said before, those two actors really do make the most of what they're given. It uses a few too many fish-out-of-water jokes and seems endlessly concerned with complaining about how evil people are, but it was still entertaining enough.

Five Favorite Films of 1952

My weak point of the 1950s, these are all still good movies, but not all of them feel like "me" movies (e.g., not enough horror and sci-fi). Oh well, they're all still very much goodly. Have fun perusing.


5. Forbidden Games

200 Items Or Less: Near Dark (1987)

A few thoughts: One of several super cool horror movies of 1987 (it was an awesome year), this Kathryn Bigelow-directed vampire thriller is maybe not the horror classic some consider it to be, but has more than enough going for it for me to consider it distinctly above average. Not only do I like the western setting, but I find the whole atmosphere and visual style quite excellent. Maybe I wouldn't put this on par with 'The Lost Boys' as far as family-of-vampires movies are concerned (that one is just too entertaining), but they feel like they might be related to one another -- 'Near Dark' being the more serious of the two. I particularly enjoy Lance Henriksen here, though that should come as just about no surprise at all, seeing as how he's one of the best things about virtually everything I've seen him in. Bill Paxton is an overacting bore. Most of the rest of the cast are fairly average, but it's really the way they all work together that sells this movie. It isn't "scary", but it's very much entertaining as a sort of road thriller with a horror edge.

200 Items Or Less: House On Haunted Hill (1999)

A few thoughts: Okay, so I knew going in that this was going to be nowhere near as good or fun as the original (William Castle & Vincent Price are a difficult director/actor combo to beat), but the level to which this movie sucked did catch me slightly off-guard. While Geoffrey Rush did his best with what little he was given, he couldn't carry this one on his own and virtually no one else seemed to be too interested in helping things along. A disgustingly underused Jeffrey Combs sits in the background while the spooky scary CG and fast edits take up a majority of the screentime. Just when I thought the movie was getting good, it turns off its brain and throws more thrills at you by making loud noises and having things pop out, screwing up what little it had going for it by abandoning any sense of logic or decent storytelling. It's hard to go into detail on what doesn't work about this movie without taking up more time than this, but I think that says enough. It's a garbage remake that totally misses the mark.

Five Favorite Films of 1951

Definitely a tricky year to make a top 5 of, but here we are! As always, these are my personal favorites. Take a look if you so desire.


5. Death Of A Salesman

200 Items Or Less: Lust Of The Vampire (1957)

A few thoughts: Not at all what I expected it to be, this early Bava (he only *kinda* directed it) film was neither a horror movie nor the vampire movie I expected it to be. How this gets labeled as horror is beyond me, considering how much of a crime/police investigation story it is. So right off the bat, it sort of lost me. But what really bothered me was in how dull the story itself was. I lost interest pretty quick, and with nonstop dialogue and nothing to grab ahold of you, my eyes started to glaze over. Without thrills, a strong story, and only decent visuals, I find myself already running low on things to say about it. With Bava working as co-director and the cinematographer, I can say the look of the film is the highlight, but without complete control, you can definitely tell he was held back and not given enough opportunities to get creative with it. There are a few aspects that work pretty well, but when all is said and done, this is a miscategorized movie that doesn't hold up as particularly good within any assigned genre.

200 Items Or Less: The Burning (1981)

A few thoughts: One of the many post-Friday The 13th summer camp slashers of the '80s, this one is particularly notable for the fact that it's probably even better than Friday The 13th itself. Giving plenty of time to establish the villain and the other characters, 'The Burning' never moves too fast or goes too slow. Everything feels well-developed and that makes the subsequent deaths and mutilations all the more effective. It's a lot easier to care about characters you're familiar with, a rule I wish more modern horror movies would follow. It's weird seeing a young Jason Alexander, but just like the rest of the cast, he plays his part well. There's a decent amount of humor to be found here, and enough nudity to keep things fun for any grown-up children in the audience. As is always the case in a movie with makeup effects by Tom Savini, the gore here is pretty great, with the camera unafraid to show off some nastiness. It's nothing overly grotesque, but effective. Overall, this is a pretty solid and enjoyable slasher.

Five Favorite Films of 1950

I'm not gonna make a huge production of these, I just like making little lists and putting them on my site. Keep in mind these are my personal favorites, so don't get all crabby if you don't like my choices. Although honestly, I can't see many complaints about this top 5... Pretty standard stuff. Eeeenjoy.


5. El Hombre Sin Rostro

200 Items Or Less: Castle Freak (1995)

A few thoughts: A slightly forgotten Stuart Gordon film about a family moving into a castle in Italy where strange goings-on go on, and it's up to Jeffrey Combs and a blind girl to get to the bottom of it. From the first half, it seemed like a fairly standard movie, but after the story really took off and layers were revealed of the family dynamic and their past, I found myself fmuch more invested than I had originally presumed. As is redundantly the case in virtually every movie he appears in, Combs does a great job in the lead, a character who at first seems level-headed, and slowly but surely is driven bonkers by the situation and the fact that no one will believe him. It's the kind of "someone is in here but when I look they disappear" movie that could have become very irritating, but instead it's just weirdly amusing. The overall quality of the production is pretty poor, but it's a B movie, so what could you expect? It isn't particularly scary or creepy, but it's entertaining and surprisingly solid dramatically.

200 Items Or Less: Fido (2006)

A few thoughts: A hilarious and clever horror comedy set in an idyllic 1950s Mayberry-esque town that just so happens to be filled with electronically altered, tame zombies. People keep them as pets, servants, and even lovers. I usually don't feel the need to include plot details in these little reviews, but this is a movie that does a lot with a concept that easily could have been stupid and mismanaged. It's hilarious, the set design, costumes, and visual style is wonderful, the cast is great, and some of the physical comedy is quite impressive, particularly from Billy Connolly who plays the titular "Fido". Though it has no connection to it at all, this movie is a sort of spiritual successor to 'Shaun Of The Dead', picking up its story very similarly to how 'Shaun' left off. While I would hesitate to put this on par with that movie, I do enjoy this one quite a bit and feel they would make for a fun double feature. I get tired of zombie movies that feel the same, and this one is a total departure from the norm. Tons of fun.

200 Items Or Less: Doctor Mordrid (1992)

A few thoughts: Jeffrey Combs, bless his heart, has the ability to make nearly anything he's in good. That's not the case here, but he does try, and I feel that's worth noting. Even in an objectively silly and bad movie like this, he delivers a solid performance and manages to make the most of this weak material. That being said, yes, this is still a pretty dumb movie. But it's a charmingly bad type of film that's hard to hate, from its consistently terrible effects to the simple and underwhelming good vs. evil story. There is nothing atypical about this movie, apart from maybe the high aspirations it had, which is infectious in an innocent sort of way. Most of the supporting cast are pretty weak, but as I said before, Combs does a solid job in the lead, even with an underwritten character. At roughly 70 minutes, it flies by pretty fast, so in the very least it doesn't overstay its welcome for too long. It's dumb, but it tries hard to entertain, and I can appreciate that.

200 Items Or Less: Freddy Vs. Jason (2003)

A few thoughts: A ridiculous nonsensical action horror movie that exists for the singular purpose of pitting two of the greatest slasher villains of all-time against each other. And if you're a fan of the tongue-in-cheek silliness often found in films of these two franchises (Elm Street and Friday the 13th, assuming you don't already know), odds are this won't be a disappointment to you. While Freddy movies did start to become a little too goofy there for a while (the 6th was total dumb crap), I feel the set-up here warrants a far less serious appearance by him, and the way they throw Jason into the story is both fitting and fun. The script is totally stupid, constantly explaining itself to all the stoners in the audience who can't keep up, all the while having fun with the crazy concept and giving said stoners plenty to laugh and cheer at. This is a party horror movie, not meant to be taken seriously at all, which is a good thing. It was mostly pretty dumb, but I had fun with it, and enjoyed some of the practical effects.

200 Items Or Less: Beyond Re-Animator (2003)

A few thoughts: The third and final (?) entry in the Combs-starring Re-Animator series, 'Beyond' is definitely the most unique -- for better or worse. Set almost entirely in a prison, the plot doesn't give Dr. Herbert West total free reign as in the previous films, but with the way the plot moves along it's hard to remember he's incarcerated at all. There's plenty of funny and goofy moments here, and Combs is his usual wonderful self, but I still found myself wishing I was watching the original instead. The gore effects are fun and sometimes pretty awesome, and the acting is mostly pretty weak, but you don't watch a movie like this for the acting. Combs is more than enough on his own, but you also have the Warden, who does some pretty great stuff in the final act. As the end of a sort-of trilogy, this isn't a disappointment, but part of me does wish they'd followed it up with something better. Fun, but forgettable. Oh, and don't forget to stay through the beginning of the credits -- it's...definitely something.

200 Items Or Less: Bride Of Re-Animator (1990)

A few thoughts: Okay, for starters, there was no way this sequel could stand up to the first one. I consider Re-Animator one of the greatest horror-comedies ever made, and while Brian Yuzna clearly has a good feel for the tone of this series (he produced the first one, after all), he could never top what Stuart Gordon did. That being said, this is still a very entertaining, albeit top-heavy sequel. What do I mean by top-heavy? Well, Jeffrey Combs, and the final 15 minutes or so are the obvious highlights. Yuzna knows his body horror, him previously directing 'Society', a similar type of movie that relies far too much on the ending. It's gooey, graphic, and some of the creepy stitched-together freak experiments are pretty awesome if you're into that sort of thing, but you just don't get to see enough of that stuff. It isn't a "slow" movie, but it takes a little too long to get into the meaty parts that are really great. Still, it's great seeing Combs back in this role, one of the all-time great mad scientists in film.

200 Items Or Less: Would You Rather (2012)

A few thoughts: One of those "how far will people go for money?" movies that's just about as typical as you could get. With a cast full of solid actors and also Sasha Grey (a porn star whose acting abilities are about as good as you might expect), the story sets itself up and goes through the motions until eventually ending on a note that could have been great, but didn't fully deliver. As usual, Jeffrey Combs steals the show, as he's given a majority of the best material, with most of the rest of the cast delegated to little more than screaming and trying to "outsmart" the game in rambling pseudo-monologues. The dialogue is mostly pretty weak, but again, they seemed to reserve all decent material for Combs, who thankfully delivers in the way he always does when offered a lousy script. It wasn't as funny as it should have been, nor was it clever or unexpected in its execution -- only one scene was even mildly surprising. It wasn't particularly gruesome, though I might expect non-horror fans to disagree. Overall, pretty underwhelming.

200 Items Or Less: Ghosts Of Mars (2001)

A few thoughts: I generally consider John Carpenter a really great filmmaker. If I were to sit down a week ago and make a list of my favorite directors, he might land in the top 10. But after watching this, I have begun to doubt just how great he actually is. Sitting through this mess of a movie, it felt like watching something by the most amateurish filmmaker imaginable. It was like he'd never seen a movie before, let alone made so many great ones. I don't get what happened. Even with schlock like 'Escape From L.A.' there were moments of genius, but here everything went right out the window. The editing, music, writing, and - yes - direction were all so poor, nothing felt like a match. I would say it was like a glued together mess, but it didn't even feel glued together, since it all came unraveled with no real resolution or point. I just finished it and I wouldn't be able to tell you what it was about, what happened, or anything about any of the characters. It was bland, but in an aggressive way. Seriously, what the hell was this?

200 Items Or Less: The Reptile (1966)

A few thoughts: One of the lesser known Hammer productions of the '60s, this is a relatively standard movie for the company, minus the heavy use of prosthetics, which definitely helps set it apart. As could be expected of one of their movies, the set design and costumes are a major highlight here, but without any really great performances to suck you in, you wind up looking at the backgrounds far more often than you probably should. A majority of the film is spent building up into the final 20 minutes or so, which finally reveals the reptile makeup. Sadly, there isn't much tension as it goes along, the story and everything it attempts to build being a foregone conclusion. There aren't many twists, and by the time certain facts are revealed, you'll probably be slightly bored or uninterested with how it ends. This really isn't a bad movie (I do enjoy watching it) but it doesn't take any unfamiliar steps, the plot being very paint-by-numbers and formulaic. Not top-tier Hammer, but the visuals are still cool.

200 Items Or Less: Abbott And Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)

A few thoughts: A reasonably entertaining but entirely dated horror comedy that throws the comedy duo into the mix with Frankenstein's Monster, Dracula, The Wolf Man, and (VERY briefly) The Invisible Man. If you enjoy these Universal monster mashes as much as me, you'll find it fun to see Bela Lugosi back playing Dracula (even if the script doesn't allow him much to do other than cover his face with a cape) and with Lon Chaney, Glenn Strange, and the Vincent Price cameo, I can't help but to feel this could have been a great final 'House Of' title, but the Abbott and Costello gimmick sort of drags it all down. Whether you enjoy their brand of comedy or not, the goofy slapstick and fast-paced '40s banter doesn't always work in a movie surrounded by these horror icons that beg for more material of their own. It's a cluttered experience that is never as funny as it should have been, even if it is considered a comedy classic. I enjoy it enough, but it should have been 'House Of The Wolf Man' and excluded the titular pair. That could've been great.

200 Items Or Less: The Shrine (2010)

A few thoughts: A gooey, bloody, demony cult movie with a few surprises up its sleeve, there's nothing particularly mindblowing about this little horror thriller, but it's still a solid bit of indie entertainment. While the low budget can definitely be felt in certain crucial scenes (weird green screen and set design limitations), where the production really impresses is in how well it handles the practical effects. The makeup and gore are pretty great here, with some cool flashes of impressive prosthetics that never feel shoved in your face to impress you -- being a film directed by the same guy who did 'Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer' I would've expected nothing less. The acting is pretty ho-hum, and the setup is more than familiar, but as previously mentioned, the plot has a few twists that keep it from playing out exactly as you might expect from a low budget horror movie like this. I enjoy the ending, and how the movie doesn't feel the need to throw bonus jump-scares at you just because it wants to be super spooky. Solid movie.

200 Items Or Less: Death Race (2008)

A few thoughts: This movie is a weird combination of being both way too much and also very little. The original Death Race was a very clever and wonderfully over-the-top satire and commentary on society's glorification of violence, with the exaggerated action being used as a tool to drive this point home, whereas this movie takes away all commentary and goes straight into "isn't this action so cool? Look at the explosions!" territory. There's no humor, no layers, and about 3000 explosions to fill these gaps. There are no moral complexities, with the hero being a good guy and the bad guys being bad. The overall production might be good, but the constant zooms and EDITING EDITING EDITING make it hard to notice whether or not the movie would/could even look decent. The action is relentless, and while I do enjoy this in some movies, I feel it was handled here with too little humor, creativity, and self-awareness to make it really work. It's not a totally horrible movie, but it's kind of a waste of time and far too busy for all the more it has to say.

200 Items Or Less - Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome (1985)

A few thoughts: Following up on one of the best dystopian action movies ever made can't be an easy thing to do. Bit that doesn't excuse this disaster. Sure, it's quotable, and sure, it has a few good scenes, but 75% of this movie is spent wasting time around a bunch of stupid kids with idiotic hair hanging out in lost boys land. Does this develop the world? Not as much as you'd hope, considering how long the movie drags us through this irritating boredom. I enjoy most of the sets and scenery, several characters have stuck with me my whole life (Master-Blaster, mainly), but the amount of time spent on the aspects that actually work is staggeringly low. Not to mention the fact that this is the third entry in a series of R-rated movies, only this time it's been neutered and given a PG-13 rating. Incredibly stupid, and devoid of the grittiness of the first two, nothing about this movie is able to completely work for me. There are 4 Mad Max movies now, and this is the only one that I don't think is really good. Instead, I think it's pretty weak.

200 Items Or Less: The Road Warrior (1981)

A few thoughts: One of the coolest action movies of the '80s, but still impaired by some of those gloriously awful Mad Max cliches, like the stupid monkey kid with the dumb hair. Does this take away from the movie? Not much, but yes, actually. Time wasted on idiotic supporting characters like this slows the pace of the film and distracts from the main story, which is simple but effective. If you enjoy dystopian action films, odds are you've either seen this already or seen it mimicked dozens of times, as this first sequel to Mad Max is the most popular in the original series, and helped pave the way for countless dystopians to follow. Stripped down and focused on a tight story, this movie has one of the greatest chase sequences ever put to film, even if the more recent Fury Road does one-up it in pretty much every way. For a relatively low budget Aussie film with very little story, this sure did influence the genre a lot. Maybe it's not the best action movie of its time, but it's a great piece of '80s pop culture that still holds up really well.

200 Items Or Less: Mad Max (1979)

A few thoughts: The film that made Mel Gibson a star and spawned several of the most well-loved and acclaimed dystopian action sequels of all-time. While the praise gets heaped onto this movie from pretty much every direction, I'm slightly more tempered in my reaction, as I appreciate it for what it accomplished, but still can't see myself considering it among the greatest sci-fi/dystopian movies ever made. I like how this movie shows a civilization on the verge of collapse setting the tone for the wild sequels, in that limbo where some of the greats belong (RoboCop and A Clockwork Orange, for example). Probably the last great car/chase movie of the 1970s, this isn't like 'Vanishing Point', relying entirely on the stunts for the movie to work, but instead features chases and action sequences sporadically and with purpose. I was surprised at how the movie approached the revenge aspect of the story, never falling to the lows of exploitation. This is an impressive and effective movie that balances a lot of genres and ideas well.