Thursday, July 26, 2007
I decided last night to watch this one with the kids. They were reluctant at first. They saw the Chilling movie box and immediately groaned. I could hear their choruses of
"Aw, not another crappy movie of Dad's!"
I assured them that this one was done by the guy who made King Kong and Lord Of The Rings. This seemed to placate them a little. They still didn't seem all that enthused. The two girls ran off in search of other forms of entertainment. The boys were too lazy to move and sat through it. It didn't take long for the gore to hit and the boys were riveted. By the end with the big assault on the house, I had all four of them watching the thing and having a really good time. It was nice to share with them a flick I had seen 20 years ago on the big screen. They thought that Jackson as Derek was hilarious and they even asked me if there was a sequel where Derek landed on the planet of the aliens and started kicking butt. They were sad when I told them no, but it sure sounded like a good idea for a flick, didn't it?
Ah, as for my review for this particular flick? Yeah, it's been done to death, we've all seen it and it's been commented on so often that anything I might add would be outdated and futile. You don't get a review with this one, just happy memories of the corruption of my lovely children.
Now, sod off!
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
This flick reminds me of those Sunn Classics like In Search Of Noah's Ark and it's ilk. I liked the grainy 16mm feel to the entire proceedings and you do see a side of 70's America that has vanished from the country and it works really well as a cinematic time capsule. The truly horrific scene would have been of these two squirrels. They are playing on a dirt road and kissing and being cute and then one gets hit by a car. The other one tries to drag the wounded one off the road to safety to no avail. Then the hawks show up. The wounded one manages to crawl to hole to safety narrowly escaping being a bird's lunch. The only way they could have gotten this shot would have been to chase the wounded squirrel with a camera. I think the squirrel was running from them instead of any bird that never shared a shot with the animal. If you like nature footage then you will like this flick. Any wild animal you can think of in North America is represented here.
Listening to the narration you can hear a man who started out being one of the best trackers in the world and then got consumed by this obsession with Bigfoot. You can even hear him lament about having to rely on second hand information to track this elusive beast. A tracker prefers to work with what's in front of him, not what people tell them so you can feel for this man's increasing sense of frustration.
Overall, the film seems disjointed. One scene runs into another fro not apparent reason. My wife, Martha said it looked like this guy did a nature documentary, added the Bigfoot shots and then did an entire narration to loosely link the Bigfoot plot line with what we were watching.
I would have to agree with her.
Ivan Marx died five years ago and the secret of his footage died with him. Most experts agree that it is fake, but his widow, Peggy Marx insists that what he filmed was real. Ivan Marx even made a sequel called BIGFOOT, ALIVE IN '82 where he is assaulted by a Bigfoot and has to shoot at it to save himself and his wife.
This is the only documentary in the 50 pack and it is definitely odd enough that it warrants at least one viewing. The bizarre, disjointed imagery of a nature documentary coupled with the constant, droning narration of a man who has lost it make for fine viewing.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
It seems that there's a drive in in California that used to be the site of a carnival owned by a guy named Van Heusen. He tore the place down and built a drive in in its place. Van Heusen eventually left to retire in Hawaii. To run the joint while he enjoyed his retirement, Van Heusen had one of his former barkers, Austin Johnson, run the drive in. Johnson hated the job.
Then the killings started. The opening scene of a couple making out is interrupted when the guy decides he needs to watch the beginning of the picture. As he he reaches out to grab the speaker, a sword slashes down and takes off his head. His girlfriend starts to scream and she is cut short by a sword through the neck.
Well, now the cops are worried. They can't have someone using a sword to whack the patrons of the theater. But who could be the killer? The manager, Johnson doesn't care about his customers. He thinks they are the scum of the earth, but he loves to take their money. Could it be Germie, the odd little fella whop picks up the place and used to be a sword swallower in the carnival? Maybe it's the pervert who parks next to people while they are making out and smacks his meat around outside of their cars? The red herrings are pretty thick in this flick, but they start dropping as quick as the slaughtered theater patrons.
Both of the cops on the case seem to be members of the Joe Don Baker School of acting and we have a hard time believing that either of them could catch a cold.
There are a few plot points that seem a little fuzzy. The major one is rthat the killer whacks the second couple and leaves the sword behind. This doesn't seem to stop him from killing again. Exactly how many swords does this looney have? And, while we're on the subject; Who thought of swords. These are big, heavy civil war cutlasses. Not an easy weapon to use in the first place and it seems out of place in the film. I think it might have been more interesting if the killer had used various things around the drive in the kill people. You know, strangle them with the speaker cord, drag a body to the swing set in the front, cool stuff. Hell, the snack bar alone has ten or eleven forms of lethal just lying around. But instead we get a sword.
The effects are passable for the time period. A movie that concerns itself with a California drive in in the 70's comes across as a little chaste with only one magnificent set of breasts and not for very long I might add.
This is the first of the 50 flicks in the box set I mentioned earlier in the blog. As a start it was okay. Cheesy, but not quite cheesy enough. I will give the producers props for the ending. Pure exploitation and a good way to play a flick that was geared for the drive in.