Frankenstein's Army (2013)

Directed by: Richard Raaphorst

Writers: Chris W. Mitchell, Miguel Tejada-Flores, Richard Raaphorst (original idea)

At first I was very skeptical about this movie - at least 95% of found footage films are pure crap. This lasted until the first monster appeared, when I thought "Hey, actually this doesn't look so bad!". After that came a "Wow!" and then another one and another one and this lasted to the very end.

 

The story follows a group of Russian soldiers, who face some really horrifying Nazi monsters in Eastern Germany towards the end of the second world war. The ever decreasing group of (anti)heroes stumbles upon a secret Nazi lab, where they find the explanation for the monsters' existence. Of course, one of the soldiers carries a camera and records everything.

 

As usual, the film gains nothing from being made in found footage style. The atmosphere is not improved one bit, while at the same time it imposes severe limitations on the narrative. Found footage films generally suffer from the "let's film everything even though we're dying left and right" and this one is no exception. The excuses the characters make to keep filming get progressively stupid. At the same time, it appears that monsters never attempt to attack the person holding the camera.

 

I also didn't like the portrayal of the soldiers. The film seems almost decidedly anti-Russian, so there are no sympathetic characters here. Everyone's either a murderer or simply insane or generally doesn't give a damn about anything. The identification with the protagonists is absolutely essential for this type of film, and yet they fail over and over again. Given this fact, some plot twists that follow (related to the identity and secret plans of some of the group members) have minimal to no impact. It's also interesting that none of the group members are played by actual Russians, so you can imagine what their accents sound like.

 

Having said all this, the movie simply wipes out all this weak points with its complete and utter coolness. You simply won't believe what kind of screwed-up creatures you're about to see here. I won't even attempt to describe them, my English is not good enough, though I suspect much better writers than me would have problems with that. The picture on the poster gives you some idea. Then, there's almost no CGI here, everything is done with the good old make-up effects. All those insane monsters, streams of blood flowing around, piled-up dead bodies, dirty old secret labs, mutilations, it's all real (so to speak). With all its drawbacks regarding the story and screenplay, visually this is a stunning work and deserves to be seen on a screen as big as possible. Thumbs up!

Doghouse (2009)

Directed by: Jake West

Writer: Dan Schaffer

Danny Dyer, Noel Clarke and the rest of the team go to a remote village to have fun and drink their asses off, only to find the place almost completely deserted. Almost is the key word here, as they'll soon discover that while all the men are dead, the women are still there, albeit transformed into some kind of bloodthirsty zombie-like creatures.

 

Don't have to say much about this one, really. Despite the great cast and a very promising premise, the screenplay is seriously lacking in humor and memorable moments. One would expect a lot more politically incorrect jokes and crazy situations (like in Feast series). As it is, this one plays it rather safe from the beginning to the end, which makes for a pleasant watch (especially with a right group of male friends), but it's hardly awe-inspiring or memorable.

Feast III: The Happy Finish (2009)

Directed by: John Gulager

Writers:  Patrick Melton, Marcus Dunstan

The third part of the best trilogy in the world picks up right where the previous one left off. The survivors from the roof finally manage to get into the jail and they meet another charismatic hero who promptly takes the lead. Their troubles are far from over, however. However strong the monsters, there's always a way to hurt them. But there's no defense from two insane and sadistic screenwriters who take every single opportunity to bring pain and misery to the group.

 

Feast III again brings the spirit of the second part, meaning - more humor and even more gruesome deaths than in the first part, but far less star power and a weaker overall look, especially when it comes to monsters. Of course, when you are enjoying the heck out of it with your friends, you'll hardly pay attention to it.

 

This part brings some more "heroes", most prominently a young martial artist called Jean-Claude Seagal (I kid you not) who spends most of his screen time with the Bartender, which doesn't have a good effect on his health. Their scenes are hilarious, particularly the now legendary Rambo III scene. Other characters also bring their share of fun, but I won't describe any of it lest I spoil it for you. If you liked Feast 2, there's absolutely no way you won't like this one. To freshen things up a bit, apart from the monsters we loved in the first two parts, the survivors also run into some kind of zombies.

 

I have only two small objections here. First, the movie is too short. Barely over an hour for something this good, that's simply unacceptable. Second, a large part of the movie takes place in the sewers and it's very claustrophobic and poorly lit, so most of the time you have no idea what's going on, which takes all the fun out of people dying. Okay, it's not that bad, you get used to it quickly, but still the second part was much brighter and cleaner (in terms of visibility, not the content).

 

We finish the story of this amazing series with one of my favorite quotes ever:

"You only need legs to kick ass, baby boy!"

Feast II: Sloppy Seconds (2008)

Directed by: John Gulager

Writers: Patrick Melton, Marcus Dunstan

 

Feast II takes place right after the first part, in which, as we remember, a group of bar patrons was assaulted and pretty much wiped out by some disgusting monsters of unknown origin. To give a quick reminder, the only survivors were Honey Pie, who screwed the others by stealing the truck that was meant to be used as a means for escape, and the group who bravely fought the invaders throughout the night - Bozo, Tuffy and Hot Wheels. Unfortunately, we don't see those latter three in this sequel, so their destiny remains a mystery. Generally, Feast II is a bit short on stars, but that's perfectly OK, since deep characterization isn't exactly the point of the whole thing.

 

Biker Queen (Diane Ayala Goldner) arrives in the vicinity in the search for her sister Harley Mom. Unfortunately, we'll remember that she was earlier blown up by Bozo (Balthazar Getty), so the only part of her that Biker Queen discovers is a severed hand. Harley Mom was also played by Diane Goldner, but since she's John Gulager's wife, it would be a shame if she didn't appear again, so she got a new (but essentially the same) part. Instead of her sister, she discovers the Bartender, who also died in the first movie, but since it's Clu Gulager (John Gulager's father), it turns out he was only heavily wounded. He informs the Biker Queen about what happened to her sister, so she and her gang tie him up and they all set out for a small neighboring town of Smalltown so she can find Bozo and wreak horrible vengeance of him.

 

Smalltown is in the meantime completely devastated by the monsters and there are only a handful of survivors. By chance, the gang runs into none other than Honey Pie, so it's the Bartender who gets the first opportunity for revenge. He immediately starts beating the hell out of her and he bites her ear off. Then the gang shoots some other people and are finally united with the other survivors, who are an even more colourful bunch than the one from the previous film. They include Slasher, a used cars salesman and one of the most entertaining characters in the series, Secrets, his cheating wife, Greg Swank (her lover, played by Tom Gulager, John Gulager's brother), Thunder and Lightning, the midget wrestlers and the owners of the local key shop, their grandmother and some other minor characters. Throughout the movie, the group tries to reach the only safe place in town and that's the jail. However, they can't reach it because of the monsters, and besides an old drunk has locked himself in and won't let anyone inside.

 

Feast II is certainly an acquired distaste (I almost said taste). While the first part wasn't exactly shy about gross outs, the sequel takes things to a whole new level by introducing such beauties and monster raping a cat, a dissection scene with monster fluids of various kind flowing everywhere, another child being explicitly eaten, a dwarf cut in half whining about his penis being cut off, a decomposing elderly lady and the infamous catapult scene which I won't spoil, but it's certainly one of the most insane and disturbing things you've seen in your life, and yet at the same time so hilarious that you'll spend almost the whole time rolling on the floor with laughter and hating yourself at the same time because there's nothing funny about it. Yeah, right!

 

The best thing about Feast II is the complete disregard for human existence. While there was some teamwork in the first part, here it's almost nonexistent. Slasher is perfectly happy to throw Greg to the monsters, not as a means of escape, but simply for revenge. Greg at first tries to save an infant trapped in a car, but then he throws it in the air and runs off while monsters eat the baby. At the end of the "successful" test of the catapult (resulting in the death of the midget grandma), Slasher sings and dances. The whole group simply throws an injured biker girl to the monsters, et cetera. This is precisely the reason why people who should know better dismiss it as being "poorly written", "having undeveloped characters", "not being scary" and similar crap, completely missing the point of the whole thing.

 

And the point is to be entertained while watching people suffer and dying. Well, not exactly "people", the characters here are one-dimensional caricatures, and that's the way we love it. They are not likable and we are not supposed to feel any kind of connection to any of them or to root for them. They are simply there to die and amuse us. And their deaths are unpredictable and almost without exception hilariously funny. Some are the result of the work of the monsters, some happen by pure accidents and sloppiness and there's also a handful of scenes of people killing other people. It doesn't make sense to talk about "leading" and "supporting" characters in the traditional sense because literally anyone could be dead at any minute. This whole series is notorious for its violence and monster bodily fluids, but for me it's this total disrespect for our fellow man (both by the writers and the characters in the film) that makes it so unique. This could have been made with far less explicit violence, maybe even without the monsters, and it would still retain its charm.

 

Sloppy Seconds is not as claustrophobic as the first movie. While the main theme is similar (some people locked in some place, fending off the monsters), it has more locations and more outdoor scenes, which is a welcome change.

 

If you are lucky and still haven't seen this film (provided that you love horror and comedy and are a bit crazy), do yourself a favor and assemble a group of equally bloodthirsty friends and enjoy like you've never enjoyed before.

 

A few words about the DVD. Unlike the previous one, this one is seriously lacking in extra material. The subtitles are missing again, and there are only a two short featurettes - the 10 minute making of, which is quite informative and entertaining, but obviously rather short, and the five minute "Meet the Gulagers", which is a nice look at the way the three generations of Gulagers appear in the movie. John is the director, his father Clu, wife Diana and brother Tom play some of the "lead" roles (put in quotes because of... just read one of the earlier paragraphs, dammit!) and the baby that meets an unfortunate demise at the hands of that bastard Greg is none other than Tom Gulager's infant son. So it all gives quite a funny perspective on some of the events - like Diana Goldner beating her father-in-law, or Tom Gulager throwing his own son to the monsters.

 

Feast II and Feast III were shot back-to-back and in fact pretty much constitute one movie, which was split into two simply for the running time. So, unlike the first part, this one ends more abruptly than the Lord of the Rings movies. Since it's in essence just one movie, everything I said for the second part also goes for the third part, so I hope its review won't be this long and boring. Over and out.

Feast (2006)

Directed by: John Gulager

Writers: Patrick Melton, Marcus Dunstan

Disclaimer: If you're expecting an objective review of this movie, you came to the wrong place. Feast (the whole series) is one of my favorite things ever and I love it to death. Every single second of each of the three movies. Okay, almost every single second (we'll come to that later). I pity people who are unable to enjoy it, because in this world there's nothing like Feast, never was and probably never will be, unless by some miracle we get Feast IV, and chances for that are really slim, seeing as how Dimension screwed up the Piranha franchise. Oh, well...

 

Now that we got that out of the way, what's this thing about, anyway? The plot is the simplest possible - patrons in a bar in a middle of nowhere are forced to fight off the invasion of some horrifying man-eating monsters of unknown origin (which is, strangely, explained in the trailer, but not in the movie). The bastards are fast, strong, ugly, extremely hard to kill and show zero regard for human life. This last thing also goes for some of the humans.

 

Surely, we have seen similar stories before, but its treatment is what elevates Feast and its sequels to the level of a masterpiece of modern cinema (note that I'm not saying "in my opinion". Feast is a masterpiece, it's a fact of life and people who think otherwise are simply wrong.) Basically, it all boils down one main thing: This is a perfect combination of horror and comedy and it succeeds where its more famous predecessors like An American Werewolf in London and Shaun of the Dead failed.

 

Simply put, this is the way to do it. An American Werewolf in London has some masterfully directed horror scenes (the beginning in the woods, that amazing subway sequence which makes you shiver, etc.), but it also has comedy (the porno movie scene, for example) which takes a lot of the impact of the horror scenes, so we end up with a movie that's too scary to be a comedy and too funny to be a horror. Similarly, Shaun of the Dead, even though it has zombies, is essentially a drama with some elements of comedy and horror, which are again clearly separated. For me this simply doesn't work (I'm one of the minority that prefers The Howling to An American Werewolf and I've never been a big fan of Shaun). If you already have great horror scenes, why downgrade them with comedy instead of making a pure horror? I think the real horror-comedy is just like a regular comedy, except it's too gruesome for you to show it to your grandmother. It has to have the same tone from the beginning to the end, where the comedy and horror scenes are not separated, but the comedy is contained in horror. So, the goal is not to have a scary scene where a werewolf kills a guy and then a funny scene where someone is telling a joke in a bar - you're supposed to have a funny scene where a werewolf kills a guy.

 

And Feast is that movie! It's a pure comedy from start to finish, and quite original at that. Right at the beginning we get a supercool infodump where each of the characters is introduced by an onscreen title, stating his or her name (or, rather, nickname), some fun fact and life expectancy. The real fun begins when we meet The Hero - he's handsome (I guess), charismatic, immediately takes the leadership, organizes the defense, gives orders and his life expectancy is, quote, "pretty f***ing good". And he dies two minutes later! So we are left with a leaderless motley crew of seemingly completely incapable losers and there's more than 80 minutes of the movie left! So right from the beginning you are aware that you're watching something different.

 

The non-stop fun here comes mainly from the movie's unpredictability. Melton and Dunstan simply avoided all clichés in their screenplay and in some scenes they made deliberate fun of them. For example, in all movies of this type (where a group of different people are forced to unite in a fight against a stronger enemy) there has to be a scene where someone takes the spotlight and starts to talk about working together, helping each other and similar crap. Here, Henry Rollins has the honor of having the opportunity to give an emotionally charged motivational speech to the others (all while he's wearing pink underpants) and while he encourages them, one guy rolls his eyes and Balthazar Getty simply asks "Are you gay?". This is just one example and the movie's full of them. If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about, and if not - take my word for it, because I'm not spoiling more than necessary. Anyway, the fact that you simply have no idea who's going to die next and that everyone is primarily thinking of saving his (or her) own ass is a source of almost endless fun.

 

In addition to having brilliant and unpredictable characters, Feast is also a truly action packed movie. I've said that the monsters are deadly, so survival is the primary (and only) goal. Finally we have a film without stupid drama and stupid romances and big speeches and similar crap that almost always pops up and ruins everything. Not here. If the characters are not dying (which is pretty often), they are arguing with each other and making plans for the action, so we don't know who lost their father in Vietnam and who was left by their boyfriend/girlfriend/husband/wife etc. - and we don't care! We only want to see another horrifying death (man or monster, it doesn't matter) and the movie flawlessly delivers. In short, watching people die has never been this fun (except in Feast 2 and 3).

 

Another thing where Feast is different than (most of) the other horror films is its gruesomeness. It's not just that the monsters are eating people, crushing their heads, tearing off the limbs, et cetera - there are other things that will make you think "Now did I just see THAT?". Just one example is when people in the bar decide to show one of the monsters they've killed to other monsters, to demonstrate the human superiority (another brilliant idea by Henry Rollins). So, what do the other monsters do? Naturally, they eat the body and immediately proceed to have monster sex, resulting in another small monster a few minutes later. Some of the things they do to people are even worse (for example, I could live without the head rape scene, but this "could / could not / live without this or that" discussion will be an important part of my upcoming review of Feast 2, so I won't elaborate further here).

 

John Gulager's direction perfectly fits Melton's and Dunstan's screenplay. The pace is extremely fast, the camera frantically flies all over, but manages to catch everything important (makers of found footage films, take note!) and it doesn't shy away from violence. If there's a scene where a head is supposed to be crushed, we see a head being crushed. When a heroine is beating a trapped monster's head, we see monster teeth flying all around. Nothing is left to our imagination and I'm grateful for that. Speaking of monsters, we get the opportunity to see them in full glory and they are really well made and horrifyingly ugly, thanks to some great make-up work by Gary J. Tunnicliffe.

 

Feast, while being innovative, original and unprecedentedly disgusting,  still retained some conventional storytelling elements (for example, most of the characters are not completely insane), which proved to be a winning combination for most horror fans. It's rightfully considered a cult classic now. However, the sequels inexplicably managed to surpass it in insanity, so I enjoyed them even more (!). They will be reviewed here shortly and at the end of the review for Feast 3 I'll bitch a bit about the wasted potential of the Piranha series (I'm not exactly sure what does that have to do with Feast, but it crossed my mind, so...)

 

Just a quick note about the DVD - it contains about 40 minutes of additional material, including deleted scenes, outtakes, the making of feature and some interviews. John Gulager, Marcus Dunstan, Patrick Melton (who's very thin and looks like a total nerd, just like me, hahaha! :-) ) and some of the producers offer some interesting information about how the movie was conceived and realized, but my favorite part is the interview with Gary J. Tunnicliffe, the mastermind who designed the monsters (and even played one of them). He's a really funny English guy, totally interesting to listen to. Look for the funny story about the way he told his father that he wanted to do make-up. If you're one of the two regular visitors of this blog, you might remember him as a co-writer and co-director of the horribly bad movie called Megalodon . Fortunately, his special effects are spot-on.

 

Anyway, this movie is brilliant. Get it. Seriously.

Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl (2009)

Directed by: Naoyuki Tomomatsu, Yoshihiro Nishimura

Writers: Shungicu Ushida (manga), Naoyuki Tomomatsu

Yoshihiro Nishimura has been one of my favorite directors ever since I saw the wonderful Tokyo Gore Police. I definitely prefer him to his colleague Noboru Iguchi, who (with the exception of The Machine Girl, which I loved) reaches for vulgar toilet humor too often, and besides, in my opinion, he harbours a bit unhealthy obsession with human ass.

 

Strictly speaking, Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl is primarily a Naoyuki Tomomatsu movie, but Nishimura is credited as a co-director and he also did the special effects, so he had a huge influence on the visual side of the movie, if not for the story. Speaking of Tomomatsu, his name wasn't familiar to me before, but after this movie I'll give him a chance, though titles like Rape Zombie: Lust of the Dead and Eating Schoolgirls don't promise something that would be my cup of tea.

 

Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl is a successful J-sploitation splatterfest, which works simply because it's so damn entertaining. If you've seen any of Nishimura's films, you'll promptly find yourself on familiar ground when some cheerful pop music starts to play while fountains of blood flow and severed body parts fly around in slow-motion.

 

Basically, it's a story of a high-school love triangle, where a poor young boy called Jyugon is sandwiched between Keiko, the vice principal's daughter and (I guess) the most popular girl at school, and Monami, an extremely cute newcomer with mysterious background, with both of them wanting him to be their boyfriend forever. So, why the hell did I just call him "poor"? Well, for one, Monami is a vampire and wants to turn him into one, and Keiko is a bitch, at least at the beginning. Then she dies, is revived by her father (who, in his free time, is an insane Dr. Frankenstein wannabe) and turned into a horrifying cut-and-paste monster made of body parts stolen from different people. And she's still a bitch! Jyugon chooses the lesser of two evils, so he and Monami are forced to fight the disturbingly enhanced Keiko and her mad father throughout the rest of the movie.

 

As with other similar films, the plot is just there to serve as an excuse (heh, like we would need one) for hilarious over-the-top violence, body parts abuse and colourful characters which never get boring. To list everything would be impossible (not to mention undesirable), but some of the highlights are a wrist cut competition, a club of black wannabe girls (this alone in America would probably put the author in jail for a long time due to racism), vice principal who dresses like a witch doctor, inventive body part combinations (a severed arm used as a propeller, eyeballs instead of nipples, to mention just a few trivial examples) and of course endless mutilations whose crowd pleasing potential is immense.

 

It's recommended to see this in the company of your male friends, especially if you can pair it with a similar but longer film, like Nishimura's Helldriver. You can also play it to your girlfriend if you want to get dumped quickly. Whatever you do, don't miss it.

Storage 24 (2012)

Directed by: Johannes Roberts

Writers: Noel Clarke (original idea and screenplay), Johannes Roberts (screenplay), Davie Fairbanks (screenplay), Marc Small (screenplay)

 

I really like it when a movie lives up to its title. This one promises us Storage 24 and boy do we get it! A whole truckload of Storage 24! In fact, the entire movie takes place... in STORAGE 24!.

 

Fortunately, there's a hideous alien monster that kills people in there, because, you see, a storage (24 or otherwise) in itself isn't a particularly interesting setting. Imagine this being a drama, where people just go around and talk and yell at each other and we have to wait all the way to the very end of the movie for someone to day of cancer... in a storage. I imagine that would really suck, even if the storage in question had been the infamous... Storage 24!

 

Apart from being faithful to its title and set in the Storage 24 (I would've felt really cheated if it had been Storage 23 or something), this was also a surprisingly cool movie. Generally, a low budget and a claustrophobic setting are a recipe for disaster, but Johannes Roberts turned out to be a pretty skilful director who managed to make it all work.

 

First of all, there are no crappy introductions - right at the beginning, the people in Storage 24 are startled by a loud noise, which upon further investigation turns out to be caused by a plane crash. One of the guys finds his car crashed by a plane engine and I thought at that moment that it would be really cool if he yelled something like "Donnie Darko, you son of a bitch!". Johannes Roberts obviously had different opinion, so he avoided this cheesy and nonsensical Donnie Darko reference.

 

The important thing about the crash (even more important than a squished car) is that it was a military plane that was carrying something really nasty. Our heroes soon find themselves locked in the Storage 24 (I don't really remember how that happened, I have this nasty habit of missing out on important details in movies) along with the mysterious content of the crashed plane. It's not a real surprise that said content is extremely hungry... and not a vegetarian.

 

The thing about that thing is that it's a very good looking thing. Don't get me wrong, it's not Cindy Crawford (hell, it's not even Keira Knightley!), in fact it's even uglier than most male members of the human population, but the design is great and worthy of a film with a much larger budget. Its mouth look slightly like Predator's and the body somewhat resembles a giant insect even though it walks on two feet and it likes eating people's faces with that hideous mouth of his.

 

So, anyway, it looks great, and there are plenty of scenes where you can see it in full glory. Low budget movies usually use that irritating monster POV during most of the killings and only show it at the end, but here it isn't like that. I imagine this was a wise production decision - save money on location and use it to make a decent looking monster. And it provides some nice bloody killings - for example, it was great when some older guy came to face the monster and tried to confuse it with his trash talk and the monster got pissed off and instantly ripped off half of his face.

 

The movie also avoids some usual clichés in the character department. Not only the black guy doesn't die first, he becomes the leading hero (!). We don't see this very often (we did in Creature two years ago, but that's about that). Of course, it might have something to do with the fact that the actor who plays that lead role was also a producer and one of the writers, but be that as it may, he's a very likeable character.

 

There's also some drama between the characters, which thankfully never gets overdone. The black guy has this blonde ex girlfriend who left him for unknown reasons and only later he finds out that she's been screwing his best friend for quite some time. That "best friend" is some white guy who looks OK at the beginning, but shows his true colours when crap hits the fan and turns into a major asshole. Luckily, all of these people (including another blonde and some other guys) are normal grown ups, so we don't have to put up with another brunette-blonde-stoner-black guy-geek formula that usually comes up when a film deals with younger people (teenagers or students).

 

Basically, these are the two main ingredients that make this movie not suck - the characters that resemble real life people and a well made monster. There's also some well placed humour scattered around, for example when the ugly Predator-like monster gets distracted by a toy puppy. Of course, this is not Alien or Halloween and you won't feel that kind of tension, but you will (probably) be entertained.

 

I also have to mention the ending, without spoiling it, of course. It's that usual twist ending that's certainly been seen before, but the way they did it here was quite... interesting. I certainly don't mind that kind of stuff, I immensely enjoyed the robot at the end of Feast 3, but some people will probably find it a bit out of place.

Blue Monkey (1987)

Directed by: William Fruet

Writer: George Goldsmith

This is why I love the eighties, the best decade in the history of humankind! Not because this movie is any kind of unforgettable masterpiece - it's far from it. In fact, for the standards of that wonderful decade, it's a completely average monster flick that you watch today and forget tomorrow. The catch is - that completely average 80's monster movie would easily blow to pieces 98% of today's genre offering with one hand tied behind its back.

 

Contrary to what you might expect from the title, there are no monkeys of any kind here, much less blue ones, though it would certainly be cool to see a blue monkey wreaking havoc and killing people. But let's not underestimate the villain here - while not being monkey (not to mention the lack of blueness), the giant insect does its best to bring as much pain and sorrow as possible.

 

The story takes place in a hospital, where a patient is admitted after somehow being hurt by a plant (!) Soon more and more people are coming and it seems a giant epidemic is about to take place. Things get worse when a huge parasite gets out of the man's mouth, runs away and gets in contact with some growth hormones. It transforms into a giant ant-like creature and the fun begins.

 

The screenplay is a bit confusing at first, with its somewhat unusual combination of the epidemic and the giant monster storyline, but we don't care about the story anyway. We want to see hideous monster violence, and we do get it! A first few killings are shot in that slightly irritating monster POV style that's mostly used for the budget reasons rather than the artistic ones, but at the later stage of the movie we see the monster in full glory (ah, those wonderful pre-CGI days!) together with some cool beheadings and other kinds of killing. The characters are the usual suspects - a concerned cop, a brave female doctor, a goofy scientist guy who's fascinated with the monster, a small kid, etc. Those clichés are certainly not irritating in any way - it's just how things go. Remember, what we don't have are retarded jocks, irritating stoners, blonde sluts, stupid idiots that make dirty "jokes" all the time etc.

 

As I said, the monster looks rather good and the rest of the technicalities is also completely fine. The music is of that stringy type that's usually used to build the atmosphere in the disease movies and it does a pretty good job here, too. The direction also does the job - you won't run away screaming to another room, but there's a good rhythm that keeps you entertained and when violence comes, it's mostly shown in full glory.

 

To tell the true, I've never heard of this movie before I found it on a friend's HD a few years ago. It's not unusual that it didn't make any kind of impact - in the eighties monster movies were on fire, we had Tremors, we had Slugs, various kinds of killing alligators, insects, sharks, octopuses, ants... Imagine an animal - there was a movie with that animal. Today of all animals we have sharks and an occasional crocodile, that's it. All other horror movies are either about zombies or ghosts or just some found footage crap that's not actually about anything. Watching older movies is like having a glass of nice cold water on a hot day. And it's not just about horror - I'm preparing to watch a truckload of ninja movies these days! Yyyyyyyyyyeaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!

The Kindred (1987)

Directed by: Stephen Carpenter, Jeffrey Obrow

Writers: Stephen Carpenter, Jeffrey Obrow, John Penney, Earl Ghaffari, Joseph Stefano

 

 

Two directors, five screenwriters?! I mean what the hell? A lame and generic story such as this could have easily been written by a ten year old on a lunch break, but here it took them no less than five people, including the writer of Psycho (!)

It all starts when a woman (apparently a famous scientist or something) on hear deathbed (because, you see, she is dying) pledges her son to go to her old house and burn everything, I mean EVERYTHING, from top to bottom. She has been conducting some dangerous experiments and wants all notes, equipment and other stuff gone before someone EVIL uses it for their EVIL purpose. However, her idiot son equips himself with a group of other idio... errr, I mean friends, and instead of fulfilling his mother’s wish, he continues her research. Sure enough, all hell breaks loose, by which I mean that a hideous monster appears and starts killing everyone. Also worth noticing is a supporting role by Rod Steiger, who plays a mad doctor.

To be perfectly honest, I wasn’t paying much attention to the “story” (if you can call it that) because I was tired and it wasn’t very engaging anyway. I couldn’t care less about any of the characters and the acting was absolutely horrible.

Thankfully, however, this movie was made in 1980’s, back when they were still trying to entertain the audience instead of just shooting random crap on a shoestring budget and hoping to sell a few DVDs by making the cool-looking cover. What I’m referring to are the special effects, which are way above average here. Great looking monsters, nice killings and one exceptionally well-made transformation scene where a woman slowly turns into a horrible fish-like creature – it’s all something you simply won’t see in today’s CGI-dominated movies. So, despite the obvious shortcomings, The Kindred deserves a look.