Friday the 13th: mid-binge (1-3)

Is horror composed of tropes, even if they are only tropes because I am coming to the film decades after its release, 'trashy' horror?

The first three Friday films follow a soon-tiresome formula: you watch a bunch of kids be kids in the woods, and then get picked off one by one, with a 'here he is again!' crescendo/de-crescendo pattern that increases in frequency as the film goes on, until it reaches an almost ridiculous pace. The 2009 remake had me missing The Blaire Witch Project, however the original (1980) creates an engaging universe in true gothic tradition. The wilderness is the most powerful character (and may i say, much of the credit for this surely goes to composer Harry Manfredini), and is responsible more so than any bloody killings or disfigured un-dead for the actual horror. Of particular note are the hilarious walk-on-roles: a power-tripping try-hard cop, a lovable ultra-geeky waitress and a collective of reticent locals.

All of these elements are watered down in the the second film, to its detriment. It lacks the variety of characters and doesn't quite nail the wilderness, but sticks pretty closely to the tropes of the original. The third follows suit right up until the final ten minutes. In both sequels the gangs of youths fall into the same character types (most notably the fool, increased in number from just one of the gang to a full three by the third film). The first film gave us a glimpse of the true potential of Jason's character, which was ignored in Part II, and only appeared again at the very end of Part III. Will the promise of Jason apparent in the original film be realised in the many sequels I have yet to watch?

On another note, my housemate David over at The Irony Mark hated the film I recently recommended, Plague Town. I maintain my position regardless.

Seed

Seed (2007)

Written and directed by Uwe Boll

Seed starts with a warning that the movie "contains graphic and disturbing footage of real events", which are included "to make a statement about humanity." Said footage is the immediately following film of dogs undergoing disgusting and shocking acts of cruelty, compiled from Peta's archives. It was hard to watch. I pushed on.

Seed is another 'based on real events' film, using the premise that Washington state law required a prisoner to be set free if they survive three shots in the electric chair. Accordingly, after convicted serial killer Sam Seed survives the chair, he is buried alive and the true events covered up. He digs his way out of his grave and resumes his killing spree. Actual truths in all this are, the internet tells me, debatable.

After the confrontational beginning, the pattern of 'dread/suspense' and 'full-frontal shocking' commences. As much as I shrank away from the beginning, my attention was soon lost as a team of police wanders through a dark and decrepit house. This became the pattern for the rest of the film, where I would lose interest while the ominous, brooding soundtrack drones as soon-to-be-victims tread nervously around in the dark, and then cringe while Seed bludgeons a woman's head to pulp (only to relax when the special effects don't hold up), and then relax, and then cringe, etc. The gory bits deliver on cringe and the suspenseful bits, for the most part, don't deliver. The film finishes on its strength. I won't spoil it.

Graphic and disturbing indeed, with a few moments of scary suspense, but ultimately pointless.

Plague Town

Plague Town (2008)

Dir: David Gregory

Writ: David Gregory and John Cregan

Genuinely creepy. If I hear that cat meowing outside my window tonight, I will be severely freaked out. Good luck being out in the countryside after dark, too. It is offbeat funny in the right moments, but the humour is underplayed perfectly, and only makes appropriate appearances as the plot veers into scary-ville. There are some edge-of-the-seat action moments, and some well-placed gore, which left me cringing at the right time... the images are resounding for their creepiness, originality and unity of aesthetic, and the mystery is played for long enough that the spooky dark and hints of what is to come are given their due. There are a few points where they are overdone (tea set), but not enough to detract from the consistent creepiness.

A family (plus obnoxious guest) visit a remote spot in Ireland to connect with their roots and re-unite with each other. Very soon, they are lost and terrified. As the film progresses we learn more about the simple premise, which is one of the strengths of the film, in that the premise allows the action to play out, and we are fed enough new developments to keep us engaged, without detracting from the sufficiently spooky situation. Bill Gibron over at filmcritic.com (http://www.filmcritic.com/reviews/2008/plague-town/) would have more exposition, backstory, blah blah blah. I say none of it. It's enough to arrive right in the midst, without having to be molly-coddled with an explanation of every contributing factor. Over at IMDB the film has a mere 4.6 out of 10 stars (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1118687/). Again I say phooey. I do understand the desire for more flesh (so to speak) and less atmosphere, but I found it creepy, haunting, and indeed pretty scary. After just having sat through the 2009 Friday the 13th, Scarecrow and the first six Nightmare On Elm Streets without feeling the least bit creeped out, this film came across as original and refreshing, with its Black Sabbath farm houses and the love child between Ring's Sadako and Pan's Labyrinth's eyeball creature. Will be recommending.

Scarecrow

Scarecrow (2002)

Dir: Emmanuel Itier

Writ: Bill Cunningham, Emmanuel Itier, Jason White, Stephen Wozniak.

Don't bother. Wikipedia credits it as being so bad it's good, due to the horrible acting, writing, and everything. It's not. It stars Richard Elfman, brother of Danny and co-creator of Oingo Boingo, if you're into that, and apparent "scream queen" Tiffany Shepis. Clicking through to her personal site, I find that I can "join the private galleries" for "hundreds of hot photos of Tiffany." No thanks.
Seriously, don't bother.

A Nightmare On Elm Street: 1 - 6

I finally went and grabbed all of the Nightmares that my local DVD shop had (turns out it was 1-6) and watched them sequentially. The first Nightmare, written and directed by Wes Craven and produced by Robert Shaye at New Line (who produced the entire franchise) was released in 1984. It is pretty good. There are some genuinely creepy images (Freddy's stretching arms (laugh if you must)), and all credit to it for introducing a strong concept and a memorable villain.

Each subsequent Nightmare up until 6 could be said to be obviously lacking Wes Craven's input, even the third, Dream Warriors (1987), which Craven co-wrote. Nothing much new is introduced in terms of plot or character, none of the additions to Freddy's mythology are particularly striking, and Freddy seems to actually get more ridiculous and less frightening, with increasingly hackneyed one-liners that end in "bitch".

My interest was peaked again by the sixth, Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991). The incremental developments that each previous sequel had made in Freddy's mythology were realized when we actually see footage of Freddy in a way we've never seen before... suddenly some complexity and emotional investment is restored to Freddy and to the film. Kudos to writer Michael De Luca and director Rachel Talalay for satisfyingly tying up a canon that was threatening to spiral out of control.

Next up is Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994), Freddy vs. Jason (2003) and the Nightmare On Elm Street remake of 2010. I am hoping that it won't just be more bizarre special effects and corny one-liners.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Dir: Tobe Hooper

Writ: Tobe Hooper, Kim Henkel

When I first heard of this movie, years and years ago, I was scared. It was all true! And a guy goes on a killing spree with a chainsaw! No way would I ever watch that, and why would I want to!?

But, the other day, I picked up a copy and prepared myself.

It is great. It is one of the best horror films I have seen. It feels like something... partially owing to Art Director Robert Burns's brilliant work with costume and set, and partially owing to the shoot locations and limitations (mid-summer Texas, 27 hour shoots, twisted ankles, cut actors, flying woodchips etc.), I can actually connect a sensation with what I'm seeing on screen. I don't need to give myself over to fantasy too far to know that that chainsaw is spitting hot oil all over the set, or that the shoot is covered in the wafting smell of collected animal carcasses, or that the crew are running for safety while Leatherface dances with ecstasy/loss/insanity. After seeing so many slick films that use these horror tropes, masks, running teenagers, cannibalism etc., and feeling nothing, it is such an experience for them to mean something... to feel the sweat and smell the rancid cooking when the family sits down to eat, the hot sticky sun and the smell of the woods when the kids stumble across the abandoned campground, and to feel the cold and the disorienting dark as the lead girl runs from Leatherface.

Now I know that this was an insane shoot, because I watched the Director's commentary. People got cut, and injured, and overworked, money was always an issue even long after release, and risks were taken which I would've doubted anyone would've gotten away with. I'm not saying that movies should adopt this gung-ho approach in order to achieve the same memorably vibrant tactile experience that this movie delivers. I'm just saying that, if I have reason to doubt the effect of this movie, I just need to remember all of the stale and slick horror films I've watched which don't feel like anything, despite the highly styilised aesthetic and convincing gore. There is not that much blood in Chainsaw. When they had to decide on how to mount the girl on the meathook, they chose, for practicality partially, to not go over the top with it. It doesn't protrude. You see no blood. It's good old fashioned acting and suggestion.

A classic for a reason.

P.S. It's not all true. It was based loosely on Ed Gein, who also inspired Psycho and Silence of the Lambs.

Pumpkin Karver

Pumpkin Karver (2006)

Dir: Robert Mann

Writ: Robert Mann, Sheldon Silverstein

Basically, a group of obnoxious teenagers are partying out in isolation, one of whom had a scarring run-in with murder a year ago. Now, things seem to be coming back to haunt him, as well as a creepy old guy who tries to entice him into 'carving' as a lifestyle choice. The best thing about this film is the comedic amount of carving, only some of which involves people. Mostly, it is full of pumpkin carving, and set in a town called Carver. We only find out two things about the main character's past: his dad disappeared, but before doing so, took him to pumpkin carving competitions. The through-line seems to be that he has it in his blood to become a career carver, just like his mysterious dad and this scary old man.

I would have been happy with that. In fact I would have been very happy to watch a film about Jonathon answering the call to hone his pumpkin carving skills until it consumed his life. As it is, the teenagers are unconvincing and typical, the 'monster' is a non-event, and the plot takes so many twists that it only sometimes hits upon potential goldmines (see earlier carving-only movie possibility), but then veers away from them. There are a few startling moments. Overall, derivative and forgettable but somehow too bizarre to ignore.

Please do a remake which does away with:

The other kids.

The party.

The catalyst event at the beginning.

The pumpkin-head suit.

The love interest.

These are all corny and pointless.

And just leave the old guy, Jonathon, lots of pumpkins, and a career in carving. Make it serial killer carving if you want.