"Movies For Quickies In The Back Row!"

Sometimes, I really think I need help. Serious therapy. I'll sit down to watch a movie, and just about ten minutes into it I'll just know that the movie is going to be dumb. Really dumb. And yet, I don't quit watching it. I sit through the whole thing. Please, someone tell me, what is wrong with me?

This movie just reeks of stupidity, and I'd really like to say that that's part of its charm, and I guess, in a way, it is, but not really. Oh, I don't know. Let me try explaining. I've seen pretty of dumb movies in my lifetime. And to be perfectly honest, I've had a hell of a good time watching most of them. There is the rare occasion that a movie just does absolutely nothing for me, but for the most part, when it comes to movies, I'm very difficult to displease. Throw on the cheese, throw on the schlock, I can take it! So, then É what's the problem with Embrace of the Vampire? Well, first of all, this movie, as I gathered from the title, is supposed to be about a vampire, but there's very little vampire action in this movie. So, even though I'm not the biggest vampire fan in the world, if the title says the movie's gonna be about vampires then it sure as hell should be about vampires. Right?

Alyssa Milano (who most of us guys had a mad crush on back when we were in 7th grade) plays Charlotte, a prosaic, young virgin who's new on campus. She's a straight-A student who was raised in a convent her entire life, and thus has a very low tolerance for her boyfriend Chris's constant "petting." There's a scene early on in the film where Chris is trying to get to the bottom of Charlotte's frigidity that is just like every other scene we've ever seen in a horror film where the desperately horny boyfriend is trying to get his girlfriend to give it up. You can almost do the scene by memory, word for word, even if you've never watched this movie before, I guarantee it. (I wonder if Kevin Williamson saw this movie before he wrote Scream, because the scene is incredibly similar to the one between Skeet Ulrich and Neve Campbell, where they discuss the guidelines to a PG-13 relationship.) Along comes the Vampire, played with absolutely no charisma, or sexual charm in the least, by Martin Kemp. He's a capable enough actor in the other films I've seen him in; not great, but passable enough. Here he just really wants to be Nic Cage. I mean, badly. It's like the guy studied all of Cage's films before he went before the cameras and then decided on an amalgamation of Cage's characters from Vampire's Kiss, City of Angels, and the beginning of Face/Off. Anyway, this vampire starts off right away moping about the one true love lost centuries ago. Flashback to scenes of him and some buxom, nubile nymphet cavorting around on what looks like the set of Legend. There they make love amongst the rippling brooks and floating pollen. There's even a large horse standing nearby, that she rides off on when they're done. Then, as he lays there basking in his post-coital glow, three vampire chicks sneak up on him and turn him into a vampire. Years later, he finds the soul of his beloved on the aforementioned college campus. And guess who harbors that particular soul? Yep, Ms. Milano.

So in three days, as it just so happens, right at the stroke of midnight (those strokes of midnight are always ruining things, aren't they?) he will die forever unless he can claim Charlotte's soul and make her fall in love with him. Why is he going to die in three days? Who knows. Does it matter? I guess the screenwriters didn't think so. The film isn't really about any of that, though. What it's really about is Charlotte wanting to getting laid, badly, but not letting herself do anything about it. It's a jibe at Catholic repression, that's all. And believe me, Charlotte wants it bad. She's slowly brought into the world of college parties by her friend Nicole (Rachel True), where sheÕs offered booze and marijuana, but of course refrains. Then, next thing you know, she's having wild dreams about some strange guy who gives her a glowing ankh (it's the vampire, of course, no surprise there) and then the next morning the campus nympho tries to seduce her. So now her problem is: "when I finally do have sex, should it be with a guy or a girl?" And from the looks of it, I'm thinking she really wants to go for the later.

So yeah, I'll admit it, this movie amused me, even though there was nothing about it that really stood out. Like I said, the vampire happenings were nearly nonexistent, and even the sex scenes are dull. And, yes, even though Milano bares it all to the camera on several occasions, I just kept thinking, "Where was this movie when I was in 7th grade?" I came to the conclusion very early on that the filmmakers here weren't really out to make anything resembling a real attempt at a vampire film. What happened was, some producer lucked out and got Milano to agree to do some nude scenes, and so then someone wrote a script about a young college girl's apprehensions towards sex. Then, another screenwriter came along (the movie credits three of them) and said they always wanted to do an erotic vampire film, so they mashed the two ideas together and there you go. The movie serves it's purpose, I suppose, which is to give all those lonely, horny geeks out there that had crushes on Samantha on "Who's the Boss? the chance to see Alyssa Milano naked. The audience for this thing is built-in, so what's the point in reviewing it? I used to work at a video store and we sold tons of these videos!

I could tell you that the direction is standard, only occasionally giving us a flash of any real style. The scene where the campus nympho tries to seduce Charlotte is kind of fun, in a kinky "why-doesn't-that-ever-happen-to-me?" kind of way. And there are moments where the director gets some nice framing with the camera, but nothing really ever comes of it. But I guess that's to be expected from the same director who gave us Poison Ivy 2 and 9 and 1/2 Weeks 2. The thing that puzzles me about this movie is that a woman directed it, and two of the credited screenwriters are women. You would expect a more sincere piece of work, I would think. I mean, even though there's nothing new about anything going on in the movie, you would imagine with that many women behind the cameras, they would at least get some depth out of the material, and not just this silly softcore stupidity. There's nothing about this movie to indicate women directed and wrote it. It might as well have been directed by some slobbering, male geek. (Although most slobbering, male geeks would've made the sex at least a little more skanky É and say what you will about skanky, at least it's interesting.)

The DVD is a no-frills package from New Line Cinema. There's not even a trailer included. The movie is presented in widescreen, which is nice, and it also features both the R-rated version and the 60-seond longer unrated edition. However, whatever the point of having the R-rated version is, I don't know. I mean, even if a movie sucks, you're still gonna watch the unrated version, right? They say you can't polish a turd, but even a turd is better uncut. With that said, all I can really say is that it's up to you. It was amusing, while at the same time incredibly irritating. It's just dumb, plain and simple, but that's not always such a bad thing, I guess. I just kept thinking that Milano would've saved herself a whole hell of a lot of trouble if she'd either just screwed her boyfriend and gotten it over with, or at least bought herself a vibrator.

I've been reviewing a lot of videos lately (as oppossed to DVDs) and that is because these are films I would like to see on DVD someday (hopefully) soon. Sure most of us may have been better off if some of these films weren't ever made at all, but they were and I'm sure it is always better to watch a crappy movie on crisp clear DVD than on murkey burnt-out video. Hey did somebody say crappy movie?!?

The Humanoid starts off with a scrolling text that rolls up and back into outer space. A triangular ship races above and past the camera over a planet. A villain in a black phallic helmet says some mildly aggresive things to a co-worker and I guess those things are supposed to be pretty important. Lord Graal is more "Dark Helmet" (Spaceballs) than "Darth Vader", but I think we are suppossed to be scared of this ridiculous rip-off of Star Wars. And it doesn't end there! Everything about this film is all about ripping off Star Wars in any way possible. They even pre-rip-off Empire Strikes Back and the new prequels and they didn't even know it (this was made in 1979 mind you). So the story I was able to wrestle out of this film is that Lord Graal wants to attack some people on the Tatooine-like world of Metropolis so he turns the bearded giant Richard Kiel (Jaws of the James Bond films) into a shaved giant that he calls a "Humanoid" which is odd because I swore that he was a humanoid even before he lost his beard. In fact everyone in this film fits the description of being a "humanoid", but I guess in space you have to have a recently shaved jaw-line in order to qualify as a "humanoid". This must have been going through Richard Kiel's mind too because he becomes enraged and starts throwing people around like they were ninja stars. Did I mention that Richard Kiel has a Space Dog that has some similarities to a certain dome-headed three legged droid? Well, yeah... Sad, huh. But it doesn't end there. There is a Luke/Obi-Wan-like boy named Tom-Tom and people actually call him Tom-Tom a lot and never once do they laugh in his face or start whistling tunes by The Tom Tom Club. There is a Han Solo guy, a Princess lady (who inexplicably jumps in and out of a hot tub just enough to wet her see-through outfit while she runs through some Death Star-like hallways. There are a bunch of other characters too, but started losing interest towrds the end and felt the urge to clean my living room. Perhaps it was the lady with a hair-don't that made her look like a badly hairsprayed cobra that made me feel dirtier than any porno could. I was happy to see wanna-be force user Tom-Tom be taken away to "the ancient land of Tibet". I like to think that on the way there, his space boat sprang a leak and his brains sucked out through his nostrals in the cold cold depths of space. See this one for the sheer audacity of it's wretched existance.

I had the luck to see this film at the private cast and crew screening at the Archlight Theatre in Hollywood before it opened (I won't get into how, but I'm neither in the cast or crew). It's the latest film by (the director and star of Waiting For Guffman, Best In Show, and a member of Spinal Tap) Christopher Guest. Shot in the same mock-documentary style of 'Guffman', 'Show', and 'Tap', this film tracks the production of a big folk music reunion festival held in the honor of a major folk music manager/producer who has recently passed away.

His biggest acts; The Folksmen (a down to earth pure folk act with songs about coal trains that crash into coal mines and about the fact that they "never did no wanderin'"), Mitch & Mickey (a duo made up of a romantic couple who separated very badly), and The New Main Street Singers (the "commercial" folk act formerly called The Main Street Singers whose members have rotated in and out through the years leaving only one original member). The Folksmen (a pseudo onscreen Spinal Tap reunion featuring the same members) often has reunion barbeques, but haven't played together since folk music's hayday. Mitch & Mickey have led very different lives since separating. Mickey is married to a catheter salesman/"model train enthusiast" (The scene where Mitch is shown the train set is one of the best in the film). Mitch has been in and out of institutianal facilities since their break-up releasing solo albums showcasing his downward spiral.

Everyone is really good in the film, but it felt like it should have been longer or the musical scenes cut shorter so we had more time to focus on the many many many characters (most of the cast of Waiting For Guffman and Best In Show are back). Fred Willard, playing a failed sitcom star turned manager of The New Main Street Singers, pretty much steals the movie every time he's on screen. Eugene Levy is good (and sorta' reminds me of Steve from the L.A. band W.A.C.O.), but his "funny voice" is a little distracting. A lot of screen time is focused on The New Main Street Players and they do have the most interesting backgrounds. One thing that made me sad was that actress Mary Gross (former SNL cast member and star of the films Feds and Club Paradise) is seen for a couple seconds as part of the original Main Street Players, but never gets any real screentime.

So this is a good film. The songs are good and the cast is great. I think that something may have been lost in the editiing somewhere. Also the Mitch & Mickey ending was a little weird. Was something cut or reshot? I'm probably just being a little nit-picky. This is a good film to catch while it is out in the theatres, but I'm also looking forward to the extras when it comes out on DVD.

I feel really bad for Spectre (aka House of the Damned). It really wants to be a good movie. It really wants to creep the viewer out. And mostly, it really wants to be something it’s not: a Mario Bava film. This haunted house/demonic possession movie rips off pretty much every other haunted house/demonic possession movie ever made. The Shining? It’s there. Poltergeist? Oh yeah. The Amityville Horror? You bet.

Evigan and Paul play, respectively, Will and Maura South, a couple who have come to Ireland to move into creepy old Abbey Manor, which Maura inherited. Little do they know that a few days prior to their arrival, two house-cleaners were killed in the room that their little girl, Audrey (Briana Evigan), stakes claim to. Of course, within 24 hours, terrible things begin pestering the little girl in her sleep. Add to that the apparition of a dead girl and Maura’s anger at her husband for an affair that he had before they arrived in Ireland, and you have a recipe for spine-tingling drama.

Not really.

As with any bad horror film (or any bad film in general) there is a nugget or two of decent ideas that could’ve made for good entertainment had they fallen into more capable hands. I mean, set-ups similar to the one in Spectre have been the foundation of a few good films in the past. But nothing works right in this film. And, to add salt to that wound, it’s also incredibly uninspired. First of all, the film is only a bit over 80 minutes long, but it feels about thrice that. Just like in Poltergeist, the daughter, Audrey, disappears within the first half an hour, into some other dimension, where she can be heard speaking in hissing, Doppler-style Carol Ann voices. I expected Zelda Rubinstein to come waddling into the frame at any moment, telling them not to worry, that she would clean this house! A few minutes later, they find her, and basically, the movie could’ve ended right there. But no, on it goes, marching into more and more absurdity. It’s like they realized they had ended their movie not more than 35 minutes into it so they said, “Hey, let’s just have the demon possess the mom, now! That’ll work, and then we can stretch this baby our for at least another twenty, thirty minutes!”

There are some truly pathetic special effects. I love it when a movie takes itself oh so seriously, and then ruins all its feeble creditability with the worst special effects imaginable. Like the terrible CGI manifestations at the end of the recent Haunting remake. I love it! It just makes the already silly goings-on seem even sillier. And when it comes to b-movies, I’m all about that. Unfortunately, there are not too many FX shots in the movie, so the laughs, I mean, thrills, come few and far between. But when they do hit the screen, they’re wonderfully stupid. Like the scene where Audrey wakes up screaming and the parents rush into her room to find some goofy “invisible” demon ready to pounce on her bed. It looks like some kid in his basement, using some cheap FX software he bought at Wal-Mart, tried to mix the devil-dogs from Ghostbusters with the cloaked Predator, and it just comes out all sorts of silly. You’ll love it. Watch the movie just for that.

Amongst all the demonic tomfoolery, there are also some gratuitous scenes of a severed hand caressing a naked woman’s body. I’ll admit, I kind of liked this part, too, but not for the obvious reasons (well, maybe partly for the obvious reasons) but because it truly is a pointless scene. Maybe there’s some way it ties into the story, but I missed it if there is. It’s just sort of there, being silly and superfluous. Gotta love it.

The thing that struck me as being the most derivative about the movie was how similar it is to Mario Bava’s film "Shock" (aka Beyond the Door 2). From the set-up, to the scenery, to the atmosphere, to the characters. It could just be me, but see for yourself. Needless to say, Spectre, try as it might (and I got the feeling that it was trying real hard at times), it is no where near as good as Shock.

Anyway, waste your time if you want. I did.

Fangoria is one of my favorite magazines growing up (and one of my inspirations for doing No-Fi "Magazine") and now they are taking the next step and producing and/or distributing horror films. Now from what I've seen of their original films so far...uhhhhh...no comment,...but this film is pretty good, although I have to say that they had nothing to do with it's production as they only distributing it for the U.S. on DVD. Well it was a good choice and here is what it is all about...

The film starts with the investigation of a strange murder and a pot of stew. The investigation of the muder takes place in a dark crowded apartment and the hungary detectives can't get the delicious smell of the stew out of their minds. Of course when a stumbling police officer discovers the empty skull of the victim's head, all heads turn to the stew they had just been raving about. This sets the mood of most of the rest of the film. Comic book cuts for a horror film with a streak of dark humor (not that annoying horror humor like all but the first two Nightmare On Elm Street films). You never lose sight that this is a horror film even when funny or silly things are happening. So, after this murder leads to a whole string of serial killings, they eventually trace the killer to a woman who was reported missing after visiting a museum. It's only after this revolation that the killer is first revealed to us and we we for ourselves how these murders are carried out. I really can't tell you much more without revealing the rest of the story to you. What I can tell you that there are some great performances from the three lead actors...especially from the spunky "ex-con" girlfriend of the lead detective. One aspect of the story is like a favorite sci-fi/horror film of mine from the 80s, but I can't say which one because that'll give too much away. A good watch and the subtitles are a little off, but very readable and not too ridiculous.

One last thing...I looked up another review of this film so I would have the cast and plot in front of me for reference and I came across this other review by this brilliant reviewer. His opening statement of "There are two kinds of Japanese thrillers: Those that don't translate very well to the Western world, and those that don't translate at all" was great and showed his wide knowledge in the area, but his labeling this film as "Jap-splatter" was even better. Coming from a partial Asian background myself, one thing I know is how JAPANESE people just LOVE to be called "Japs." If you're Japanese, you should e-mail him and let him know how much you like it. By the way, his review was shite and he had no idea about what was going on in the film (which he admits), so it's safe to read since some of his statements about was happens in the film are incorrect. It's a good film, not the greatest, but worth a rental or a cheap dvd on sale if you can find it.

So, as usual, Something Weird has managed to pack a whole lotta stuff into one DVD. This time it is all about Schlock-King Harry Novak with a film he directed as well as another he produced...and so many extras on top of that. Whew. So Booby Trap isn't so much about boobies (and there are more than a few of those) as it is about a crazy retired marine out on a rampage with his...mines. Ok, weird concept. A man and his mines. It isn't very often you see a movie about a man going around blowing people up with mines,...but he does and this is probably the only movie with this plot. So this guy makes his way across the U.S. blowing up the occasional army man or hippy as he does. The sister of one of his victims is contacted by a special marine who I guess is special because he wear flamboyant 70s clothing complete with Butterfly collar and brown bell bottom pants...and his hair....oh, my. Speaking of flamboyant, there is a little more gay bashing in this film than I usually like (I I usually don't like any at all). The one gay character (played by an actor whom Harry Novak outs in his commentary track) gets beaten and verbally abused throughout the entire film. Eventually all the charicters meet in a (literally) explosive scene involving acting that my G.I. Joe figures that I played with as a kid easily put to shame.

The next film in this 2 movie DVD presentation is called The Takers and it is all about people taking drugs, having sex, two girls being taken hostage, then having sex, then more sex, then some more sex, and some sex again. Then some more sex. The one thing this film teaches us is that when women are forced to have sex, they quickly learn to like it. The screenplay is by a man named "Dash Freemont" and I hope a big naked man in a cowboy hat slapped him hard across the face after seeing this film. So other extras on this DVD are a bunch of trailers for other crazy films (many of which I'm sure we'll see released by Something Weird in the future. Also included are a couple shorts, one being a documentary on a biker gang called The Aliens. There is even more, but I could go on forever. Get this DVD for a group viewing at a party, but save the second feature for private viewing.

When we ever get around to doing our No-Fi "Movies", this is certainly a genre we'll definitely have to visit. The cheesy cheesecake sex comedy about girls who start a new business, group, or club only to find themselves at odds with some stiff competition (puns are always intended with these kinds of films). See our review of H.O.T.S. for the best example of one of these films.

In this particular version of this type of film, a bunch of girls in their late twenties to late thirties have just graduated high school and find themselves taking over the gas station of one of the girls' uncle after he becomes very ill. I think the "girls" in question have different personalities and backgrounds, but they all end up topless anyway and all we are left with is a bunch of oddly shaped boobs. Perhaps Citizen Cane wouldn't have been such a lousy bomb if Orson Welles had decided to run around topless in short-shorts like the ladies in this film. Well, anyway, realizing sex sells, they run around in skimpy outfits at the gas station, have complex conversations about how to properly pump gas (seriously, this conversation is worth the rental price alone!), and use the newly installed loudspeaker to draw customers away from the "evil" gas station across the street with promises of full pumps and lurid lube jobs. In one scene a guy getting his car checked finds a randy gas pump girl naked in his back seat who pretty much has sex with him to get him to spend more on his car than he originally intended. Wow, what great role models these girls are! I wonder if they know how to spell too! So they soon have cars lining up down the block...but, c'mon...this was 70s; there was a gas crisis going on. Sure, we all found out much later that the gas shortage was artificially conceived in order to drive up gas prices, but they didn't know that...even with their overly extended high school educations. Soon they find themselves stealing gas from their "evil" neighbors, but even that doesn't satisfy the demand. What can they do?!? Will they be able to stay in business and have sex with more strangers? Oh, you know they will and it'll all be solved by some kind of wacky caper and there will be all sorts of clapping and yelling at the end, but that is part of the fun of these kinds of films. Rent this for a group viewing, but don't forget to drink a lot and dance to the music at the end too.

Here is another film I found in the same genre as Gas Pump Girls. This one is called Starhops and it practically shares the same plot as Gas Pump Girls only in this film the leading ladies take over a Car Hop stand and they must defend it from the local evil evil gas station man...er...ok, the Gas Pump Girls evil nemisis was an "evil" gas station, but you gotta give Starhops something, right? Oh, and there is very little nudity in this film. A butt shot and that is about it. Anyway, it is very hard to find any info on this film on the internet and most of the sites including IMDB have misleading or wrong information on this film. I'll try my best to tell you what I can in my own way.

The film starts with a badly done Star-Wars-esque yellow scroll with a bad Vader-esque voiceover. After friends (the blonde) Angel and (redheaded vixen) Cupcake buy the place, they hire a tall and tan French girl (with one of movie history's worst French accents) to cook for the establishment which for some reason had no budget for a cook so she has to work for food and board. Upon opening, their first customer is a gristly biker who tries to rape the cook, but they get him back later by letting him surprise her in the shower without her consent...oh wait, that is TOTALLY F'D UP!!!! What they hell were the people behind this film thinking?!? Well, the director of this film (Barbara Peeters) DID direct Humanoids From The Deep which involved Sea Monsters raping unsuspecting beachgoers to impregnate them with killer Sea Monkeys. Barbara, what the hell, dude? Anyway, lets move on... So the evil Gas Corporation guy send his lazy son to Starhops to get a job there in order to spy on their goings-on. They laugh at him when he shows up to get a job (how would he fit in the uniform?), but when he threatens to sue for discrimination, they hire him on the spot and make him his own skimpy outfit to parade around in. It would have been funnier if he had to wear the same outfit they do, but oh, well. So will he get the goods on the ladies and turn them in or will he learn to love their wacky ways and fight on their side for Starhop justice? (As if you don't already know.) Will the gruff biker learn to use his attempted rape powers for good? Those are but a few of the even fewer questions to be answered when you track down a copy of this film (which from what I've read is even rarer that Gas Pump Girls). It's certainly worth a rental, but I found a site that was selling an old VHS copy for 150 dollars!!! That is fightening. I guess you can wait for a DVD version of this film, but it'll probably be years before you see one (unless some video company reads this and tracks down a clean print to distribute). This one is safe to watch with your friends who are uptight about nudity,...but who wants those kinds of friends anyway? It's a fun viewing nevertheless.