FYI: This should be treated as NOT SAFE FOR WORK. So don’t come complaining to us when your boss peaks over your shoulder to your monitor and sees gore slathered, beaten or partially naked women, gushy exit wounds or generally disturbing imagery (see images below).  That’s on you!  This is a horror post.  I can’t (and won’t) make everything PG.  LOL

MY CALL:  Pain and transcendence paint the theme of this intense, cruel, relentlessly brutal film that will lead you to dark places free from the moral burdens of compassion.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Though not quite as intense, Deadgirl (2008) and I Spit on Your Grave (1978, 2010) push moral boundaries far and hard.  LANGUAGE:  French; I bought the “unrated” DVD which offered it dubbed in English.  The dubbing is really poor–think Anime.

Amazon offers a friendly piece of advice: “Avoid, if you can, reading anything about Martyrs before viewing–this ultra-intense Canadian-French shocker benefits from discovering its horrors cold.”  I followed that advice.  I haven’t even seen a trailer.  What follows is my account of this film which was revered by some as being among the “10 most disturbing horror movies” and by Amazon as only advisable to “the most hardcore patrons of 21st-century torture cinema.”  I find over-hyping to be symptomatic of the breeding grounds of mediocrity.  Does this film follow suit?  No.  Does it break free from the over-played mold?  ABSOLUTELY!   So I suggest you STOP READING THIS REVIEW UNLESS YOU’VE ALREADY SEEN THE MOVIE.

We are introduced to an underage Lucie escaping an abandoned building where she was kept captive, beaten and malnourished under destitute conditions presumably as a sex slave.  Lucie ages through adolescence exhibiting damaged antisocial tendencies and self-destructive proclivities.  15 years later, Lucie (Mylène Jampanoï; Hereafter) pays a visit to her to childhood captors.  She finds revenge, but no true satisfaction; only utter mental breakdown exacerbated by her surrogate tormentor, her demon-like anthropomorphized self-loathing and guilt.

Be prepared for a steady stream of disturbing imagery with mixed distortions between compassion and black-hearted evil.

Anna (Morjana Alaoui) has been watching out for Lucie since they met in an orphanage.  She arrives at the scene of Lucie’s revenge.  It’s bad.  Really bad.  And Anna tries to help clean up the mess and keep Lucie out of trouble.

Just when you thought you knew where the story was going, another weird story arc falls in your lap…over and over again.  This film is beyond bonkers, but executed intelligently.  You find yourself caught between wanting to laugh at how senseless it all is and wanting to scream because it’s frustratingly insane.  But, by the end, everything feels well-linked together in hindsight; in fact, brilliantly so.

This woman came across some tough times.  Her every movement, twitch and mumble conveys a powerful pain.

This film is rich in gore, visceral brutality, intensity, violence (against women; not sexual in nature), torture and desperation.  There is also a fair bit of nudity.  But it is presented more to embrace humility and vulnerability than perversion.  Artfully handled, the nudity is an effective device that will elicit many feelings, none of which being arousal.

Pascal Laugier, the man to blame for The Tall Man (2012), wrote and directed this film.  The Tall Man was an indecisively written film featuring an unreliable story, making for an unsatisfying waste of time drowning itself in too many loose plot elements.  Did that happen here?  Well…sort of.  Yes in the sense of the complete plot-based pandemonium which somehow neatly tied together in the end.  No in the sense that I actually loved this film–whereas I hated The Tall Man.

Organized madness best describes Laughier’s storytelling style.  If you crave brutal intensity, let this film impress you.

MY CALL:  A simple not-too-over-the-top story, tolerable acting, some really fun kills and floating body parts make this well worth a low budget watch.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Jaws (1975; if you’re in a serious mood).  But if you’re looking for something a little more festive, then aim for Deep Blue Sea (1999), Shark Night 3D (2011), Piranha (1978), Piranha 3D (2010), Piranha 3DD (2012).

The story is simple.  After a tsunami ravages an Australian beach town, survivors are trapped in a grocery store with a hungry great white shark.  The setting makes for a nice change of pace amid the shark movie extravaganza that has filled the last decade (e.g., Sharktopus, Mega Shark, Sharknado, Sand Sharks, Megalodon, Megashark vs. Giant Crocosaurus, Snow Shark, Megashark vs. Giant Octopus, Jersey Shore Shark Attack, Dinoshark, Attack of the Jurassic Shark, Jaws in Japan, Ghost Shark,  Malibu Shark Attack, Super Shark, Swamp Shark, 12 Days of Terror, Two-Headed shark Attack, Shark Swarm, Sharks in Venice, Spring Break Shark Attack, Shark Attack in the Mediterranean, Open Water, Red Water, The Reef, Hammerhead…need I go on?).

This is a bit more than a group of scantily clad brainless beauties and over-sexed underwear model punks against some sharks.  Tina (Scream Queen Sharni Vinson; You’re Next) and her ex-fiancée Rory (Xavier Samuel; The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2, Anonymous) are among the survivors.  They’re real people with real problems and real feelings.  A criminal (Julian McMahon; Nip/Tuck, Fantastic Four) and a young juvenile delinquent are among the dozen survivors, so naturally there is some bickering about trust issues.  But we don’t find ourselves too bogged down by their simple dynamic.  Some of the acting is pretty bad, but at least Sharni Vinson holds her own throughout (though not with a lead role or a breakout performance like she did in You’re Next) and Julian McMahon is also consistent.

Once the action starts, the girls are not in bathing suits and everyone keep their shirts on.  Lending a bit more credibility to the movie, rather unflatteringly the girls are clothed and wet with stringy hair and all most of the time; far from dolled up.  They also come up with some neat ideas, including a believable improvised diving suit caged for shark bite resistance and tubed for respiration.  Even when predictable, a couple of the kills were especially entertaining.  They also made good use of a cute dog.

Director Kimble Rendall has little experience being in charge, but has an impressive resume as a second unit director including two of the Matrix movies, I, Robot (2004), Killer Elite (2011) and Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009), so I’d expect he’s learned a bit about building tension and action.  His skills translated well in Bait–understanding his budget limitations.

There’s a mixed bag of terrible to acceptable CGI wound and shark effects.  But really fun anyway.  Latex and prosthetics work were easily “good enough,” but what saves the movie’s effects are the humorously placed severed parts. Whether bobbing in the water or drifting asunder, there’s plenty to entertain.  But, by the end you’ll find yourself wondering just how many people a 12-foot shark can eat before it gets full.

All in all, well worth a low budget watch.

MY CALL:  Believably tough women (and men) in a desperate situation fight for their lives…and I bought it!  It’s a familiar premise presented in a gritty different way that works surprisingly well with actors capable of matching the grave tone.  IF YOU LIKED THIS WATCH:  The Shrine (2010) and The Last Exorcism (2010), both with extremely different premises but offer similarly unexpected surprises from low budgets.  I hope the best for these risk-taking filmmakers.

A group of survivors in a post-apocalyptic world have banded together, pooled their resources, and are trying to survive.  We know there were originally twelve of them and now they are down to five.  But what caused the apocalypse and wiped out humanity, killed their seven friends, and whatever it is they’re protecting themselves from remains a mystery.

Our survivors include Adam (Shawn Ashmore; the X-Men trilogy, The Following, Mother’s Day, The Ruins), Rick (Dominic Monaghan; Heroes, The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Lost), Shannon (Shannyn Sossamon; One Missed Call, Catacombs, The Order), Mary (Ashley Bell; The Last Exorcism, The Last Exorcism Part 2) and Henson (Cory Hardrict; Warm Bodies, Return of the Living Dead: Rave to the Grave & Necropolis).  As you can see, all of these actors have a fair bit of experience when it comes to supernatural and horror themes.

Whereas Mary comes off as the tough-as-nails survivalist right away, Shannon is much more compassionate, embracing her sensitive needs for her “family” above her own survival.  But when things turn grave, both of these women grow a thick, gritty skin.  They’re both tough and I found their actions and strength credible–which isn’t common in action or horror movies.  Score one for good casting, direction, writing and solid acting for these two actresses (Ashley Bell and Shannyn Sossamon)!  I hope to see these actresses getting more serious work in the near future!  Of the two, Ashley Bell was most shocking–a breakthrough performance really–and her character had the backstory and motivation to justify her outstanding actions (and the acting behind them).  In my eyes, she joins the ranks of Scream Queen Sharni Vinson for her work in You’re Next (2013).

Ashley Bell

With this strong heroine-emergent threat comes a double-crossing twist.  As we identify their enemies, more enemies emerge from within.  I’m intentionally not revealing what their enemies are because I didn’t know when I watched this (and I’m grateful I didn’t know).  So I’d advise you not to read other reviews for fear of such revelations.

I must say that I am impressed with the action quality in this movie, a movie which I never even heard of until Amazon recommended it.  Really impressed.  There isn’t a ton of action, but what you get is heavy-hitting, brutal and not over-sensationalized with Hollywood choreography.  Everyone isn’t a ninja or ex-special ops agent.  Their tactics were smart, simple and appropriate to the situation and resources at hand.  They’re fighting to survive and I believed they were fighting to survive.   Only in a few brief moments did  I question anyone’s combat prowess as a bit too much–but let’s just let them have their moments, right?  I’m also happy to forgive some CGI use for blood spurts during the phenomenal action sequence at the finale.

The acting wasn’t amazing across the board.  But it was often credible, much more credible than you’d expect given the budget.  In its non-mainstream style and breakthrough overall quality (again, minding the low budget) this movie struck me much as did The Shrine (2010), which was also not like much else I had seen and also featured an Ashmore twin (Aaron, in this case).  The black and white medium chosen by the director (who has 20 years of experience as a second unit or assistant director) struck me as risky, but it worked wonders for the pilot of The Walking Dead and it worked well here.  Speaking of which, The Walking Dead season 4 writer Luke Passmore wrote this.

These filmmakers took some risks and it paid off in spades!  Watch this and appreciate how no one else tries to do this and, when and if they do, they over-sensationalize and consequently fail.

MY CALL:  Asian children mummy zombies, an eight foot tall old lady ghoul and a roid-raging mutant poodle monster…yup, you’ve got to see this.  Once this movie got going (about halfway through) it was a lot of fun and it managed to steer away from being “just another zombie movie” while maintaining all of the hokiness.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Other older zombie movies that successful avoid being “just another zombie movie” include Flesh Eating Mothers (1988) and Dead-Alive (1992).  For some other horror movies that stand out from the same old recycled paradigms try The Abomination (1988), Leviathan (1989), The Deadly Spawn (1983), The Kindred (1987), Night of the Creeps (1986), The Thing (1982; not The Thing 2011), and Slither (2006).

A detective and a homely psychic go to a coroner’s office to investigate a Japanese man’s claim that his ancestors have been protecting humanity from zombie children.  This sounds fun, but it takes over 40 minutes for anything to happen and those 40 minutes are painfully stale with wretched writing and talentless acting; it’s not even campy or cheesy, it’s just plain bad even by “bad horror” standards.

Meet your resident psychic.  Hey, remember how horror movies always used to cast bikini models to play scientists, psychics and paranormal investigators?  And how we’d roll our eyes out how lame that was…?  Yeah, I’m missing that right now.

When she’s not using her second sight to hunt down Asian children zombies, she dreams about hugging dead children zombies.

Thankfully, at some point they realized they had to let the cat out of the bag.  And in this case “the cat” is a trio of slimy, twitchy Asian zombie children.  These zombies have a little more flavor than most.  Being hundreds of years old, they look a bit like unwrapped mummies with sunken leathery faces and being children makes them a bit more creepy.

This looks like a paparazzi photo of Lindsay Lohan skipping out on rehab again.

Like any good zombie, these zombies manage to infect others.  Not by bite, but by contact with their slime.  A despicably heinous old lady becomes infected and mutates into an eight foot tall, googly-eyed ghoul with menacingly clumsy long-limbed prosthetics.  It was hilarious and awesome!  Another fine infection greets us when the woman’s poodle licks up some slimy zombie secretions.  This poodle transforms into a giant, roid-raging monster reminiscent of Dead-Alive (1992).

Here is our before picture of a crotchety old lady and her dog.

AFTER PHOTO:  Yup.  This happens…awesome!

“Bro, how much do you think the poodle can bench?”

Once this movie got going (about halfway through) it was a lot of fun and it managed to steer away from being “just another zombie movie” while maintaining all of the hokiness.

MY CALL:  Not scary, not even a little bit, not even to a child.  I would recommend this to no one who has seen and enjoyed a horror movie that released after 1970.  As far as horror goes this is lifeless; regrettably stagnant.  However, there’s an okay story behind it all.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  The Good Son (1993) for kinder-horror and The Conjuring (2013) for a classic-style horror story involving kids.

Okay.  So, normally I’d normally never watch a movie this old.  I typically stick to the 70s for my “really old” horror.  Why?  Well, as someone who grew up in the 80s I was never–NEVER–impressed by the dated “classics” of the 50s and 60s with Christopher Lee and Vincent Price.  I think they’re lame. They probably once were scary, back before people came up with much more scary stuff in the films of the following decades.  But know this.  It’s not about CGI or effects for me.  It’s that these old movies were made in a time when people were soft to the likes of suspense and scares (in my opinion).

I took a long shot chance on this film because someone wrote that The Exorcist (1973), The Visitor (1979) and this film were the three greatest horror movies he’d ever seen.  I agree with the status of The Exorcist.  The Visitor was truly awful, but so weird it was funny (unintentionally, that is, and not in a good way).  And that leaves The Innocents to be judged…

A wealthy man inherits two young children.  Wanting nothing to do with them, he hires a governess to replace the deceased governess before her to raise them.  When we first meet the children, Flora is an angelic delight and Miles has just been expelled from school, but seems quite polite and charming all the same.

Like any modern spin on this story, weird things start to happen around the governess.  Only, in this dated medium, the transpiring events and the uninspired camera angles filming them are in no way creepy.  She sees figures, hears voices and the housekeeper slips and says a few suspicious things.  But it never feels urgent or forewarning–even though I know it’s supposed to.  Other things that would be terrifying or off-putting in the hands of a director today strike me as mundane…the boy asks if the governess’ house is “large enough to hide secrets,” unidentified figures pace in the shadows, Miles gives the governess a long and overly mature kiss, and the kids play a game of hide and seek (see The Conjuring to see this done well).  Once we graduate to hints of violence and temper in the children, it’s not a fraction as eerie as it should be.

The housekeeper plays the role of the enabler.  Like the children’s acolyte, she attempts to dismiss or belittle the governess’ increasing concerns regarding the children. It’s as if she wants the governess to question her own senses.

The #1 Amazon review stated “The Innocents is as scary as anything that’s come out of Hollywood in the last twenty years.”  I couldn’t disagree more.  Basically, EVERYTHING in the last 20-30 years of horror has been far scarier than this.  For this, held to modern standards, is not at all scary or suspenseful.  This feels no more “scary” than a drama about an overwhelmed single parent on the Lifetime Network or the Hallmark Channel.  I struggle to believe that in 1961 this was considered scary until I realized how little of a horror education people had at the time, with no PG-13 or R-rated movies trying to push the envelope for the biggest scare, shock, reveal, tension or twist.  No.  Like the picture, this is black and white and just as plain.  Even the attempts at jump scares were completely ineffective as if someone turned the horror dial to “mute.”

The only good thing I have to say about this was that the two child actors were spectacular!  Not scary, but quite talented.

I would recommend this to no one who has seen a horror movie that released after 1970.  As far as horror goes this is lifeless; regrettably stagnant.

MY CALL:  Not nearly as epic of a guilty pleasure as the original nor as outrageous, but still LOADS of bad, bad, so very bad fun.  This sequel focuses more on comedy than it’s more serious-toned and much more breasty predecessor.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Deathstalker (1983).

Back by popular demand comes the long-awaited sequel to Deathstalker (1983)!!!  Leaving some big shoes to fill, Rick Hill did not return to reprise his lead role as Deathstalker.  I guess after the raging success of the seminal Deathstalker film he was busy working on Hollywood studio pictures–but evidently none of them ever got made (just check him out on IMDB).  Attempting to do justice to the role is newcomer John Terlesky (Vampirella, Chopping Mall).

Always stumbling his way into adventure, Deathstalker meets Reena the semi-cute seer (Monique Gabrielle; 976-Evil II, Evil Toons, The Return of Swamp Thing), his main squeeze for the movie–while he’s being faithful anyway.  She foresees his upcoming adventure and knows some of the bad guys he’s supposed to face.

For someone who sees the future, Reena was pretty shocked by these zombies.

Hey, Reena?  Did you foresee the threesome Deathstalker was planning while you were…JUST IN THE OTHER ROOM!!!

Oh, Reena.  How quickly you forget Deathstalker’s ways.  When will you just learn to avoid frat bros with unearned nicknames like Deathstalker?

The cast of villains includes the extremely androgynous condescending and fabulously manscaped Jarek the sorcerer, his scantily clad head henchwoman Sultana (Toni Naples; Sorority House Massacre II, Sorceress, Chopping Mall) and the even more scantily clad soul-sucking Princess Evie (also played by Monique Gabrielle), who he made by cloning the soul of Reena.  These villains bring Deathstalker boring fights, fun humorous villainy banter, and one awkwardly loooong sex scene.

Here’s Sultana–and she’s wearing some perfectly practical combat gear.  It looks VERY supportive.

Hmmm.  What shall I do today?  Do we have any young boys left?

Here is Princess Evie thinking about sucking a lucky young man’s soul.

She sucked it.  She sucked the soul right out of the guy.  You can tell by the soul drippings coming down her lips.

But you don’t get good at sucking souls over night…it takes lots of practice.

Oh no!  Now she’s going to suck Deathstalker’s soul!  How can we stop the evil soul-sucking Evie?  Simple.  Blunt force trauma to the head.

During their adventure, which is much more aimless than the original, Deathstalker and Reena encounter a cemetery full of zombies, survive some Indiana Jones-esque traps, meet an Amazon Princess (Maria Socas; The Warrior and the Sorceress) and Deathstalker enters a wrestling death match with the plus-sized Amazon champion Gorgo (Queen Kong).  The action is all pretty boring for action’s sake, but they have their funny moments.

Amazons come in all shapes and sizes, you know?

Yeah, this looks fair.

This sequel seems to lack much of the attempted high fantasy of the original.  But what this lacked in Dungeons & Dragons ilk, it more than made up for with super cheesy one-liners.    Sadly, this humorous approach to the franchise left little room for gore, as we find none of the festive battle amputations of the original except for one delicious finisher to the finale fight.

So Deathstalker and Jarek are the “Titans” that “duel” in this lame fight.  A frat bro with a dumb nickname and this other guy who looks like he’s never done a push-up in his life?  Yeah, this fight’s gonna’ be awesome!

[death gargle]

Some playful quotes include “What’s your name?”  To which Deathstalker of course replies “Deathstalker.”  “Is that your first name or your last name?”  There are plenty of sex-based jokes as well.  For example, “Is that your sword or are you just happy to see me?”  I’m not saying the writing is clever.  I’m just saying it made me smile, even if it was stupid.

To that end, I should point out that, despite the nudity, this sequel is not an exploitation flick like the original.  Men aren’t forcing themselves on women, Deathstalker isn’t as much of a jerk frat bro, there is no rape, women are generally treated with more respect (as opposed to entirely with disrespect in part 1) and the female characters share in delivering the comedy.

Oh, right.  In the end they crown Reena princess.  She dresses in the same conservative wardrobe as her evil soul-sucking clone twin Evie.

This is a more “wholesome” TnA fantasy-adventure flick.  Oh, and stick around for the credits.  They show us some endearing bloopers.

MY CALL:  This franchise just isn’t getting any better.  WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD:  Puppet Master (1989), Puppet Master II (1991; the most slapstick crazy of the first three), Puppet Master III (1991) and Puppet Master 4 (1993).  Also try Ghoulies (1985) and Ghoulies II (1988).  FRANCHISE TIMELINE:  Retro Puppet Master (1999) introduced us to young Toulon in 1902. Puppet Master III (1991; set in 1941 and having the highest production value of the first three franchise installments) comes next, then Axis of Evil, and prequel Puppet Master (1989), which occurs decades later in present day and is seamlessly followed story-wise by Puppet Master II (1991; which was the least serious, most zany installment).  Puppet Master 4 (1993) returns us to present day following Puppet Master II.  Puppet Master 5 (1994) picks up right where part 4 ended and marks the most noticeable drop in quality of any other franchise installments.  Then, presumably taking place after part 5, Curse of the Puppet Master randomly happens and is difficult to link to the others.  Lastly, Puppet Master: Legacy (2003) takes place in present day and does nothing for the storyline.

We return to the Bodega Bay Inn in 1939, when Andre Toulon (William Hickey; Puppet Master) commits suicide before being captured by the Nazis who have so desperately sought the secret of eternal life which animates his puppets.  A young fan of Toulon’s puppet work, Danny recovers Toulon’s puppets and learns how to animate them with the magical serum.

Director David DeCoteau (Curse of the Puppet Master, Puppet Master III: Toulon’s Revenge, Retro Puppet Master) hasn’t done much good for this franchise since its third installment.  Here, he directs a less zany story than parts 4 through 7, which serves as a promising return to the original franchise standard.  Danny finds himself protecting Toulon’s secrets while trying to prevent the Nazis and Japanese from destroying an American weapons factory.  This is all fine, but far too much time is spent focusing on Danny, the Nazis and the Japanese and far too little screen time is afforded to the puppets, which, last time I checked, is why I’m watching this!  I’d rather have a terrible story and more puppet action…like in Curse of the Puppet Master.

Here our Japanese yakuza spy mistress is comforting a Nazi in her theater safehouse.  “You’re such a pretty Nazi…”

Our hardly featured puppets include Blade (parts 1-2, 4-8), Leech Woman (parts 1-3, 6-8), Pinhead (9 movie veteran), Tunneler (9 movie veteran) and Jester (9 movie veteran).

Pinhead just doesn’t look right, here.

When Danny opens the puppet chest we see a few others (not featured in previous movies) that receive no screen time or explanation.  Danny also creates a new puppet with the soul of a loved one–it’s a little ninja with throwing stars.  The effects (or lack thereof) behind the puppets’ movement is perhaps the worst in the franchise.  When the 20 year old franchise opener has better special effects than the most recent entry (part 9), something is terribly wrong.  Folks are getting lazy!  Worse yet, they stopped using stop-motion and/or real human hands for Pinhead!  Now he’s just “some doll” and his iconic hands have been rendered indistinct.

So, were there any cool puppet-driven scenes?  Eh, not really.  Leech Woman pukes a leech into a yakuza’s sushi dinner.  After he eats it (chewing it up–which clearly doesn’t bother the leech–and swallowing it), it is evidently unharmed and lacerates his throat, leaving him spewing blood.  That was probably the highlight.

Unless I’m mistaken–and I’m not!–there has been a major error in the story’s timeline.  This is set in 1939 and Toulon commits suicide. But Puppet Master III takes place in 1941 with Toulon in Berlin…and he’s ALIVE…before he ever even escaped to America’s Bodega Bay Inn.

What can I say about this?  It was better than Puppet Master: Legacy, which was really just a highlights reel more than a movie.  That’s about it.  Just not good.  Don’t watch it.

MY CALL:  This very brutal, very gory evil witch demon film brings to an intestine-tangled close Argento’s “Mother Trilogy” in blood-soaked form.  IF YOU LIKED THIS WATCH: This film tried to be brutal and largely succeeded.  Fans of this wincing style should try Martyrs (2008).

Sarah Mandy (Asia Argento; Land of the Dead, Demons 2) is an American art student in Rome.  Unfortunately for Sarah, her supervisor opens an ancient container filled with ancient things and reads some ancient words…and we all know that reading ancient words scribed on ancient things is a death-dealing no-no.  I mean, did you see Evil Dead (2013) or The Cabin in the Woods (2012)?  So terrible evil immediately converges upon her and, if for no other reason than proximity or contact with the box, that evil subsequently aims itself at Sarah.

“Hey, an ancient cask with ancient writing on it.  Let’s open it and read some ancient words off of ancient things.  What’s the worst that could happen?”

THIS!!!  This is the worst that could happen!

Oh, wait!  It actually gets WORSE!!!

Opening this ancient cask has unleashed The Mother of Tears (Mother Lachimarum), the demonic spirit of a long dead witch, upon the city–resulting in a wave of suicides and violent behavior.  Also serving as a dark arts homing beacon, gothy witches in outrageous Harry Potter-chic fashion and loud eye make-up from around the world are gathering in Rome to celebrate the return of Mother Lachimarum and bring about the “second fall of Rome”…basically Witchageddon.

Looking for answers, Sarah seeks help to learn about a spectral “voice” that guides her to protection from the invading witches and how she and her deceased mother are linked to the witches.  Sarah meets an exorcist, Father Johannes (modern horror forefather Udo Kier; Iron Sky, The Lords of Salem, Blade), who explains much of this mystery.

Director Dario Argento (Suspiria, Tenebre, Phenomena) brings us a dark story with gothic scoring (which is at times perfect, and at others poorly rendered).  This is the third and final installment in his “Mother Trilogy,” which he began 30 years prior with Suspiria (1977) and Inferno (1980).  This is not a fraction as eerie as its trilogy predecessors.  However, the gore is deliciously over-the-top from the beginning, including images of flesh-tearing torture, smashing heads (repeatedly and to gut-oozing malformation), BDSM, blood-spewing gashes, dismemberment, eye-gauging, disembowelment, gushy cannibalism, wading through a pit of partially liquefied human offal and being strangled by one’s own intestines.  There is even a scene in which a woman is speared in her…ummm…reproductive system–it’s all pretty brutal.

“Oh, where are they going to put all these human sacrifice guts and bodies?”

“An offal pit, of course.”

All of these images are meant to shock and provoke cringes and winces.  Regarding this suspected goal they are often successful, especially during the finale as we are bombarded by what could only be described as the Devil’s orgy.  After all this successfully provocative imagery, Sarah’s defeat of Mother Lachimarum is abruptly lame and anticlimactic.  At least it occupied but a minute of a 10-minute gross-out montage full of activity.

The story was alright, but suffered a painful slowdown at about the halfway point.  But what fueled this movie was a shock and awe campaign of gore and brutality.  With that, Argento was quite successful and I was pleased.

Just FYI, this movie poster has no business looking this cool!

MY CALL:  Low budget melty mutants get cranky and start killing things.  That’s all I needed to hear to know I wanted to see this.  If you feel that’s not enough to make an informed decision, then I assure you, this movie is NOT for you.  LOL.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  I was quite pleased with the much more “Lovecraftian” Lovecraft adaptations Dagon (2001) and The Resurrected (1991).  Also try Hellraiser (1987) and The Re-Animator (1985) for serious gore and weird tones.  And if you enjoyed watching Zack’s mother’s transformation in The Curse, then try Flesh Eating Mothers (1988).

During a storm, young Zack (Wil Wheaton; The Big Bang Theory, Eureka) witnesses a meteorite landing on his stepfather’s farm.  This meteor brought with it an other-worldly ooze that gets into the local water supply.  After exposure, the local produce immediately grows to look appetizing, but is filled with what looks like blood, guts, bugs and gook; the chickens become mangy and violently carnivorous; the cows become explosive reservoirs of rotten flesh and pestilence; and Zack’s mother slowly becomes a psychopathic, drooling, open sore-covered pulsating mess!

This actress moved on to play the head orc in Lord of the Rings.

Zack’s stepfather is a no-nonsense, “our God is a vengeful God” kind of Bible-toting, God-fearing farmer who disciplines his kids with the back of his hand.  He is in denial about everything that’s going on around him (even as his wife turns into a warty, stabby monster), thinking that God is punishing them all.  Being the only one to avoid exposure to the water, it’s up to Zack to save his kid sister from the strange malady that has struck his family and their land.

Zack’s stepfather and stepbrother start looking like Klingons that spilled acid on their faces.

The story follows the same (simplified) trends as Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) and The Stuff (1985), and helped gestate the similar Slither (2006).  Although allegedly an adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft’s “The Colour out of Space”, I hardly find any Lovecraftian satisfaction in this–although it’s still a dumb-fun movie.

Here’s something totally random and symptomatic of terrible writing.  At some point a water treatment investigator (John Schneider; Smallville, Super Shark), who has nothing to do with the recent meteorite sighting, randomly comes to Zack’s aid.  The movie would’ve been fine if that character was completed deleted–no one would even notice.

It is blatantly obvious that this movie had a super-low budget, and with that comes its share of major filmmaking and writing flaws.  For example, the local doctor is somehow also the only scientist investigating the meteorite and its potential dangers.  The general randomness of the scenes in which we see new mutations just substantiates the lack of thought that went into this screenplay.

The gore and make-up work is entertaining.  Whether a blood-gushing head of lettuce or the pulsating forehead of Zack’s mom, I was constantly smiling.  As the movie progresses, so do the pus-oozing make-up jobs on Zack’s parents and stepbrother…who eventually “melt” away.

A not so appetizing head of lettuce’s guts.

I think that’s why we decided to watch this in the first place, right?  To watch melty mutants kill people.  I certainly didn’t expect much from the writing, nor did I care that it sucked.

MY CALL:  The most awesome, exploitative result of combining Alien, The Thing, a lot of boobage and D-budget.  For bad horror entertainment value I give this an A+!  MOVIES LIKE Forbidden World:  Galaxy of Terror (1981), Leviathan (1989), The Thing (2011), The Thing (1981).  ALTERNATIVE TITLE:  Mutant, which sounds like a much less appropriate title for the Roger Corman Galaxy of Terror follow-up, but is more appropriate given the actual nature of the movie.

This review is of the unrated Director’s Cut, which has a running time of 82 minutes (5 minutes longer than the 77 min for the theatrical version).  I’m guessing that whatever people saw in theaters, this will just be more of that.  As it turns out, in this case, all 5 of those extra unrated minutes are apparently of boobs.  For real!  Like 5-10% of this movie’s running time probably has boobs in it.  That’s more than Piranha 3DD, whose title screams of boobage!

Our story begins with Commander Colby (a reckless mix of Han Solo and Snake Plisskin) and his robot crewman on a spaceship under attack from some other random spaceship.  With lame effects and nothing at stake; it’s no Star Wars Tie-fighter dogfight, that’s for sure.  After surviving this brief mess, his robot dishes out the bad news that mission directives are sending him to some planet instead of home.  So they set a course for Xarbia.  Is it me, or do a shocking number of sci-fi movie planets seem to have a “z” sound?

Colby travels to an isolated research facility where risky work with genetic engineering is conducted to create a productive new food source for mankind.  Colby meets Dr. Hauser, the sultry Dr. Barbara Glaser (June Chadwick; V, The Last Horror Film), the adorably pink-outfitted Tracy (Dawn Dunlap; Barbarian Queen), and a few other people who are hardly introduced–probably because they’re going to be the first to die…spoiler alert.  The female researchers are both inordinately hot, dress in sexy pajamas unbefitting of a space station, they both make passes at Colby and, not surprisingly, we see them both naked several times.

Just a few examples of how the interplanetary research station dress code matches that of a 1970s sorority house.

What is surprising is that they both made a pass at Colby!  I mean, sure, he has the title Commander and a uniform.  But he’s pretty homely-looking as far as space cadets go…

He looks like James Caan, but a few chromosomes short.

The researchers introduce Colby to one of their experiments: “Subject 20″, a metamorphic mutant that continuously changes its genetic structure as it develops.  Hauser and his team of scientists are excited about it and think it’s wicked awesome, but the no-nonsense Colby just thinks it should be destroyed.  No surprise here, but it turns out Colby was right!

The engineered mutant cocoons itself into a pulsating mess (which actually looks like someone hung a dead facehugger like a Halloween decoration) to transform to its next state–that of a black jellyfish thing–which leaps on some dude’s face (again like a facehugger) eats his brain and infects his body with its saliva which keeps the guy alive but brain dead.

A facehugger-like “cocoon” utilizing laboratory and natural habitats.

The plot plays out a bit like Alien/Aliens (1979/1986) meets The Thing (1981), with members of the crew dying in analogous ways (e.g., the robot, like Bishop, has its torso separated from its lower body).  The monster grows rapidly from a football-sized jellyfish to a toothy-mawed abomination and infected human bodies slowly transform into foamy carrion sludgy undying masses as the creature virally exploits and re-appropriates each cell’s function.  When we finally see a full grown monster, it looks like a hybrid of a giant rubber black widow and an Alien xenomorph.

He got bitten by an alien jellyfish-thing and then this happened…

Then he started to melt away without actually dying…

Then he turned into a flesh cocoon…

And a day later he “grew” and turned into a human meat farm…

To feed this handsome critter.

What separates this Roger Corman cult classic from most others is that it actually has a clever plot element.  Whereas the researchers where trying to genetically engineer a productive new food source, Subject 20 (created with the same research) uses its likewise-engineered saliva to synthesize human bodies into protein-farming masses of flesh.  But don’t take that to mean that this is at all sophisticated or to be taken seriously.  I mean, two women taking a completely gratuitous shower together discuss communicating with the monster, which they decide to go do half-naked in super-short bath robes.  This doesn’t work out well.  The monster uses its Alien xenomorph-like tail to impale Barbara up her….ummmmm…you know.  Typical Corman schlocky stuff.

Naked Chick #1: “Okay, sooooo…I sort of have a neat idea and I wanna’ know what you think.”
Naked Chick #2: “Tee hee hee!  You already got me into the shower with you naked.”
Naked Chick #1: “No, it’s better.  So, we go find that alien that’s been killing everyone and–now here’s the great part–we try to negotiate with it in our bath robes…”

“Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!  I don’t understand.  This idea was so good!”

The special effects are charming.  The gore is deliciously overdone and super-abundant, the spaceships look abundantly fake, the monsters are cheap but entertaining, and then there’s even more gore.

What major sci-fi releases focus on–for example, character development, logical plots driven by character actions, and elaborately staged set pieces–Forbidden World throws right out of the window to give viewers a briskly paced 80-minute grindhouse experience.  Enjoy the ride.

Let’s start with this image.  People got the wrong idea that this was just another Rob Zombie shock and awe horror campaign flick because of this image.  But let me put you at ease.  This image inhabits a mere 30 seconds of screen time.  That’s it!  So if this contributed to any harsh pre-judgments please cast them aside and give Zombie a chance.  He’s trying to change and this movie proves it.

MY CALL:  Zombie has sidestepped shock and awe in lieu of character-driven story development and a more subtle, creative approach.  It’s not stellar.  But the first two acts were well done and make me eager to see what (and how) Zombie does next.  MOVIES LIKE The Lords of Salem:  Book of Shadows: Blair Witch (2000), Mother of Tears (2007).

Heidi (Sheri Moon Zombie; Halloween, Grindhouse, The Devil’s Rejects) is a friendly recovering addict and a very alternative-meets-Bohemian-looking Salem radio DJ. She is anonymously sent a box containing a record inscribed “the Lords.”

Heidi plays “the Lords’ greatest hits” on the air–which sounds like playing a death metal band’s record backwards–and women across Salem become possessed instantly over the air ways.  Francis Matthias (Bruce Davison; X-Men, The Crucible), an author, witchcraft historian and guest on Heidi’s show chatting about the Salem witch trials and how witchcraft is a psychotic practice, is a little apprehensive about the Lords’ song.  Francis tasks himself with investigating the “Lords of Salem.”

A cadre of local Salem witches.

Written and directed by Rob Zombie (Halloween 1 & 2, House of 1000 Corpses), this movie aims for gravity and an artistic journey into Heidi’s possession and why she was chosen.  One device which Zombie uses differently than most masters of horror is nudity.  We see a lot of nudity, but often not on women you’d find “sexy” as they are occasionally older, heavy and/or filthy, nearly corpse-like in some cases.

Neither one of Zombie’s typical gore fests nor a cookie cutter teeny bopper horror film in which brutal death is prescribed by premarital sex or underage drinking, Zombie set out to really make a film.  Great lengths were gone to capture powerful shots, eerie transitions and haunting lighting.  At times Zombie’s attempts to be dark and artistic were overdone by a hand not yet sufficiently practiced behind the camera.  But I appreciate what he tried to do and his less elaborate attempts (generally in the first and second acts) felt effective.

Heidi (Sheri Moon Zombie) succumbing to the spirits of long-passed witches.

You can’t get too critical over this film.  You need to let go and take the “trip,” because increasingly psychedelic is exactly what is produced before your eyes and ears.  I feel that Zombie clearly had difficulty tying together an adequate ending from an otherwise very effective serious of weird events.  Even though I had no clue where these events were leading me–and, evidently Zombie didn’t really know either–they had my attention and interest, making the ending all the more abruptly disappointing.  At least the ending really only takes about 10 minutes.

This is about where things started getting weird and hard to follow.

If you know Rob Zombie’s work, then you know that pretty much everything stars his wife and shows her fun parts.  Neither of these are bad things.  I’ve been generally please with Sheri’s acting and…her ummmm…you know.  But one thing I love about Rob Zombie beyond his vision for horror is how he loves to cast horror icons.  We get horror cameos galore, over 20 in fact, including Heidi’s cohosts Herman ‘Whitey’ Salvador (Jeff Daniel Phillips; Zodiac, Halloween II) and Herman Jackson (Ken Foree; Halloween, Death Spa, Dawn of the Dead), along with Dee Wallace (The Howling, Cujo, Critters), Meg Foster (They Live, Leviathan, Masters of the Universe), Nancy Linehan Charles (Bram Stoker’s Dracula, The Stepfater), Bonita Friedericy (Paranormal Activity 3), Andrew Prine (Witchouse II: Blood Coven, V: The Final Battle, Amityville II: The Possession), Richard Fancy (Species, Spellbinder), Michael Berryman (Weird Science, The Hills Have Eyes Parts I & II), Judy Geeson (Inseminoid), Sid Haig (Galaxy of Terror, Creature), Barbara Crampton (Re-Animator, You’re Next, Puppetmaster), Clint Howard (Halloween, House of the Dead), Udo Kier (The Theater Bizarre, Mother of Tears, Iron Sky), Camille Keaton (I Spit on Your Grave, The Butterfly Room), Richard Lynch (The Sword and the Sorcerer, Puppet Master III: Toulon’s Revenge), Silvia Moore (Chillerama), Maria Olsen (Paranormal Activity 3), Michael Shamus Wiles  (Hellraiser: Inferno, The Puppet Masters, Puppet Master 4), Lisa Marie (Sleepy HollowMars Attacks!), Maria Conchita Alonso (Predator 2, The Running Man) and Daniel Roebuck (John Dies at the End, Final Destination).

I am generally pleased with Zombie’s body of work and this represents an important step for him.  He has sidestepped shock and awe in lieu of character-driven story development.  That didn’t go well from start to finish in this case, but he certainly had my attention and interest beyond the first 60-80 minutes, shortly after which this trippy descent into madness falls flat on its back.  His attention to lighting, Sheri’s acting and a lighter approach to intensity make me eager to see what he does next.

For better or worse, this ending lends itself to serve as the beginning to a new witchy story arc in Salem.

MY CALL:  Not good and not too bad, but definitely refreshing to see Adkins clearly having fun with a character that isn’t serious-as-cancer like his other roles.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Desperado (1995) and The Rundown (2003).

If I was directing Scott Adkins (Undisputed 2 & 3, The Expendables 2, Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning, Assassination Games) there are two things that I wouldn’t want him to do: 1) use guns or 2) try to act.  But director Eduardo Rodriguez (the man behind the dare-to-be-great upcoming sequel-remake Fright Night 2) asks Adkins to do a lot of both in this movie.  I think Eduardo Rodriguez thinks he’s Robert Rodriguez and that Adkins is a young Antonio Banderas–clearly neither come close.

What we get here is a gringo’d-up Desperado with ambitious filmmaking devices, one-liners and humorous scoring with none of the truly awesome–but a good dose of just plain fun.  The gun play simply doesn’t deliver, the women don’t come off strong at all (although the character Anna is clearly meant to be a tough Salma Hayek type), the blood spilling is inconsistent and unimpressive, the stunts largely suck, and Adkins doesn’t throw nearly enough kicks.  Okay, now I’m an Adkins superfan and I should probably admit that, for me, “enough kicks” would constitute as many kicks as Scott can possibly execute during his screen time with a break every few minutes for an elbow.  There were some fights that could have been awesome, but the choppy filming and even choppier editing completely masked all of Adkins’ often superhuman skill.

Adkins plays a fish-out-of-water in Mexico with no name (like in Desperado) and a bag with $2 million dollars.  Naturally no one likes him because he’s a gringo, the local bad guys find out what’s in the bag, and Adkins must do everything he can to keep his nameless character alive. That’s the story.  That’s really all that’s worth saying.  Oh, wait, and Christian Slater (Guns, Girls and Gambling) is in it.  There–that’s everything now.

Like in Desperado or The Rundown, Adkins eventually finds himself fighting the whole town.  Fight sequences and bad ass maneuvers normally filmed and presented to us on screen in singly cut shots are done in 3-10, during some fights I felt like I was seeing 30 cuts in the time I could blink 30 times.  It really makes it hard to appreciate the action.  Some techniques (like super fancy kick-disarms resulting with the gun in Adkins’ hands) were done in slow-motion and just a few cuts, which felt more appropriate and enjoyable.

For all the things that were awful about this movie, it really could’ve been great.  All it would have taken was a better director (not necessarily more expensive–just better at this kind of movie), a few well-trained stunt men for the fights and a stronger female costar.  The harder our director tried, the laughably worse things became.  For example, there’s a fight against a big really tough, otherwise normal looking guy, and Adkins is getting his butt kicked.  When he discovers his foe’s “weakness” is obsessively keeping his hat clean and on his head, he swiftly defeats him by exploiting this nervous tick.  DUMB!

Even as a Scott Adkins superfan or an action movie buff (who isn’t concerned with budget) I’d recommend skipping this unless you are, too.  Maybe you love all of our Dolph Lundgren Bad Movie Tuesday reviews like In the Name of the King 2: Two Worlds or Retrograde …then this is probably for you!  Adkins has his moments when he tries and to be Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson– often falling understandably short (not everyone can be The Rock)–but all the things you normally love about Adkins like his acrobatics, fast martial arts choreography and jump-double-spin kicks have been turned down from an “11″ to damn near mute.  However, some positive points can be found in the humor, like when Anna hoists her boobs in Adkins’ face while she dresses his wounds using her bra and panties as tourniquets.  Adkins clearly had a lot of fun with this role…even when he didn’t have boobs in his face.

Yup.  That’s Yvette Yates…and she’s distracting!

I guess it’s nice that we got to see Adkins fun action star personality a bit.  His roles are normally dead serious and cold as ice.  I just wish we had a better director to preserve his other action star-centric talents.

Hello all. Mark here

Great heroes need great villains. A solid bad guy not only engages us in the journey but provides tension, dread and excitement. If you look at some of the highest grossing films of all time you will notice a trend. For example, The Avengers (Loki), Harry Potter (Voldemort), Dark Knight (Joker), Lord of the Rings (walking), Skyfall (Silva) and Toy Story 3 (that fluffy evil bear) all feature incredible baddies and made tons of money.

I’ve decided to compile a list in hopes of sparking discussion, debate and eventual realization that my bad guys are the best. Enjoy!

1. Stansfield. Gary Oldman/ The Professional

Scary, unpredictable and drugged out. Oldman’s performance  set the bar  for all other actors attempting to be insane drug addled  bad guy cops. By the time he shoots Leon and gets blown up by grenades you are overcome with grief that this murderous turd got the better of the hero. Stansfield also delivered odd quotes that any villains would be jealous of:

“I like these calm little moments before the storm. It reminds me of Beethoven. Can you hear it? It’s like when you put your head to the grass and you can hear the growin’ and you can hear the insects. Do you like Beethoven?”

2. 006 and Sean Miller/ Sean Bean  Goldeneye/Patriot Games

What I like about Sean Bean as a bad guy is that he never seems outmatched.  Instead of being some aloof villain he always puts up a great fight. Plus,  he figured Bond out. These quotes prove it:

“I might as well ask you if all those vodka martinis ever silence the screams of all the men you’ve killed… or if you find forgiveness in the arms of all those willing women for all the dead ones you failed to protect. “

“Back from the dead. No longer just an anonymous star on the memorial wall at MI6. What’s the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?”

The  final fight scene in Goldeneye was incredible. The fast paced, evenly matched brawl took place on top of a satellite hanging over a large drainage dome. I remembered the prior Bond fights and they all paled in comparison  In Patriot Games he had Harrison Ford on the run and could only be killed by being impaled on a boat then blown up via crashing into rocks. You can never count this guy out. You think he is dead in Goldeneye then he comes back and survives a massive fall and explosion. The only thing that can kill him is an exploding, million ton antenna. Badass!

3. Boba Fett/ Empire and Return

Vader, huge ships, stormtroopers could not catch Han Solo and his crew. However, Boba could. The dude rarely speaks and is always chilling next to Vader or Jabba. Fett is a mysterious villain (How long did it take him to design outfit) who gets the job done and is probably the only person who Vader would catch a beer with.  I still defend his death scene because I think the only to kill him would be by total luck.

4. Magua/ Wes Studi/ Last of the Mohicans

Total, Uber, Badass (see above pic). You cannot escape this guy. The hunters from Butch Cassidy and Centurion could not have escaped Magua. The climatic scene with the soundtrack blaring while he fights and kills Uncas makes most humans burst out in tears. Sure he dies. But, could you defeat a very angry father with a large spiked weapon?

5. Hans Gruber/Sheriff of Nottingham/ Alan Rickman Die Hard/Robin Hood.

Smarmy, Intelligent, and funny. Nobody has the eurotrash villain down like Rickman. Many actors have tried to match this performance and most of them have failed. Whether threatening to cut people’s hearts out with spoons or telling his henchman to “shoot the glass” he is always thinking of unique ways to hurt people.

6. Special Mention: Inez/Rachel McAdams/Midnight in Paris.

Inez would convince Han he was just a subpar villain. She would scowl as Boba showed off his latest jetpack innovation. She pushed her writer boyfriend to mini panic attacks and wooed the pompous Michael Sheen. Inez and her family could push Angela Lansbury’s character in Manchurian Candidate to depression. Also, Inez sounds evil.

There are many honorable mentions.  Gene Hackman from Unforgiven, Mr. Blonde, Bill the Butcher,  Jaws, Aliens, Predators, Frank Booth, Dolph in Universal Soldier and Rocky 4, The bad guy in The Crow,  Hal, Anton Chigurh, Michael Myers, Nickelback, Hannibal Lecter, Leatherface, the femme fatale from Double Indemnity…the list goes on and on.

That is the list! Let me know what you think. Make sure to leave a comment and tell me your 5 favorite bad guys.

MY CALL:  This is a Beauty and the Beast romantic fantasy story crafted by a horrorsmith using horror elements.  Surprisingly good!  MOVIES LIKE Meridian:  Another odd but love-oriented and worthy Full Moon release is Dark Angel: The Ascent (1994).  This isn’t the only movie to use an art restorer as a vector for evil curses.  Mother of Tears (2007) did the same to a much less romantic and waaaaay more gory end.  Looking for another werewolf love story, then try out the Underworld franchise (2003-2011).

Director Charles Band (the Puppet Master, Subspecies, Ghoulies and Trancers franchises) in this more seriously approached, surprisingly good Full Moon romantic fantasy-horror release.

Two attractive American women find themselves in Italy after graduating from art school.  Gina (Charlie Spradling; Bad Channels, Puppet Master II, The Blob) is working in art restoration and her friend Catherine (Sherilyn Fenn; Boxing Helena, The Wraith) has just inherited a castle.  The castle comes with a curse about some wizard who built the castle and cursed people by turning them to stone–and there are loads of statues.

After enjoying a traveling carnival attraction complete with a dwarf  (Phil Fondacaro [pictured above]; Troll, Ghoulies II, The Creeps), strong man, snake charmer, fire eater, belly dancer, magician and other carney weirdoes.  Looking for some interesting company, Gina and Catherine invite the performers to dinner, after which they are drugged and sensually “taken” by the magician.  But the strange thing is–because, no, we haven’t hit the strange part yet–the magician has a twin brother whose werewolf roots become most evident in coitus.

Sex in horror comes basically down to this: if you’re not having sex with the killer, then you’ll be killed for having sex.

The next morning the girls have little recollection of what events transpired and Catherine’s nanny (Hilary Mason; Dolls, Don’t Look Now, Robot Jox) is left to clean up the mess.  Later Catherine is plagued by visions of a murdered young woman.  The nanny reveals that the “vision” is linked to the castle’s curse, Gina’s recent work on a painting is connected to it, and that Catherine is the next!

The effects and action are the primary weak points of this film.  The transformation scenes are mostly reduced to frame shifts between human and werewolf form (i.e., there is not much of an on camera “transformation” at all), the werewolf make-up is unimpressive, the limited action is implied more than really being delivered, and there are no scares.  But “horror” wasn’t really the point of this film, implied violence was all that was necessary for the story to be effective, and the lack of scares was intentional and not a product of shoddy direction.  This is more of a romantic fantasy story crafted by a horrorsmith using some horror elements.

This film revealed that Charles Band is capable of so much more than his campy, gory horror.  The sexuality of the magician and his twin tender a strong dichotomy.  The magician is cruel, manipulative and lustful whereas his werewolf twin is gentle, protective and passionate.  The werewolf offers a more Beauty and the Beast sense of fantasy.

Not to knock this movie, but it’s interesting timing that this movie was released just as Ron Perlman and Linda Hamilton’s Beauty and the Beast series (1987-1990) was coming to a close.

This was surprisingly good!  Really.

MY CALL:  As tasteful and organized as a man’s detonated entrails, this movie is a cheap, poorly executed, un-thought-out Alien rip-off.  After the first couple scenes it loses any promise of being a fun “bad” horror flick.  I’ll give it a “D” only because I enjoyed the beginning.  WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD:  Just stick to Alien and The Thing (1982) if you want an alien-contamination creep show. IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH:  Probably any “Roger Corman presents” classic.  Other gory sci-fi horror of the era include Galaxy of Terror (1981), Forbidden World (1982) and Inseminoid (1982).

This corridor looks nothing like the corridor in Alien.

A strange, unmanned Caribbean ship approaches a New York harbor and is quarantined.  Upon investigation, members of the crew are found “ripped apart” to various degrees, one of whom evidently appeared to have exploded like a small bomb was inside his chest.  They also find a huge shipment of coffee bean boxes filled with over-sized avocado-like egg things that are bioluminescent, pulsating, somewhat translucent and covered in green ooze.

These eggs should clearly come with a warning label indicating that handling them results in their detonation, spraying you with acid, and somehow causing your chest to explode.  These “eggs” turn out to be more than just eggs and—dun, dun, duuuuuuuun—of alien origin.

Our investigators discover a warehouse full of them in the Bronx.  They connect the dots to an international conspiracy which includes NASA and the Colombian coffee industry.  This may sound exciting, but after the first 20 minutes (which were delightfully gore-tastic) this movie really slows down to a disinteresting pace where scenes devoid of action are needlessly dragged out.  Clearly this flick was made to prey on sci-fi fans left hungry for more since the release of Alien, which also had chest-burst-inducing, extraterrestrial, acidic, slimy eggs.  What a coinky-dink, right?

The concepts are conveyed poorly and the three portions of the movie (the first 20 minutes, the next hour, and the last 20 minutes) each included a new plot element which linked poorly, if at all, to the others.  The makers of this atrocious flick clearly had no idea what they were doing and forced out this movie with all the grace of passing a kidney stone.  Don’t watch this unless you stop it after they investigate the ship in the very beginning.

FYI:  This movie was Contamination but then retitled Alien Contamination in 1982.  You’ll find both on Amazon with the exact same info.  The catchphrase on the movie poster “You will feel them in your blood” does not apply to any single aspect of this movie at all!  WTF!?!

MY CALL:  Bizarre and haphazard, Argento’s clumsy storytelling advances at a painfully slow pace until the brief, bonkers and satisfying finale.  Largely not worth a watch.  MOVIES LIKE Phenomena:  Look into Dario Argento’s other work.  His stylistic approach is consistent throughout his body of work.  ALTERNATE TITLE: This film was also released as Creepers.

Director Dario Argento (Mother of Tears, Suspiria) is considered a master of horror.  I’ve read reviews suggesting that this is “Argento’s neglected masterpiece” and “one of Argento’s best.”  Sorry to be a naysayer, but a masterpiece this is not.

Jennifer (Jennifer Connelly; Labyrinth, Dark Water), not your typical protagonist, is a sleepwalking psychic with an affinity for insects.  Argento’s (at best) clumsy storytelling follows his typical trends.  Young women are being murdered and a heroine is guided by erratic, choppy, trance-like dream sequences to solve the mystery.  When Jennifer befriends an entomology professor with a pet chimp, that seemed to push it all over the edge of absurdity for me.

Yup. This is totally normal. Forensic consulting work with the police…with the additional expert opinion of a chimp.

Our 14-year old heroine teams up with the professor to solve a string of murders taking place at a private school in Switzerland.  Making him perhaps one of the worst academics ever, the professor seems to have no difficulty finding instant credibility in Jennifer’s telepathic connection to insects.

Now I called Argento’s storytelling “clumsy” at best, and I realize this may upset some people. But watch this movie and I challenge you to find any plot significance in any of the scenes…any of them.  The film wears on, murders accumulate, and we find ourselves no closer to knowing who or what the killer is or the motive behind the killing.  Not only does this story fail to lead us anywhere, but there are no attempts at clues, linking events or red herrings to keep us guessing.  The only thing I found myself guessing was why the Hell was this movie even made if Argento had nothing to say?  Aimless story or not, Argento sees fit to lead his actors into a strong fog of melodrama to make viewers believe that these vapid scenes actually yield some significance.

That said, whereas Argento is no storyteller, he has a strong grasp of instilling urgency as he makes almost every scene intense (even if unnecessarily so), using wildly inappropriate rock music to score up tension in otherwise mundane scenes.  It was as if someone calmly walking down a corridor merited a hair metal guitar solo.  The dream sequences feel drug-induced and keep our eyes locked on the screen so as not to miss a thing and the actors’ melodrama certainly keeps our attention as we wonder how they may be linked to the murders.

Argento’s strong suit is gore, which is most highlighted by the scenes with the deformed child and when Jennifer falls into a pit of festering human offal reminiscent of the pool scene in Poltergeist (1982) and the grave-digging scene in Drag Me to Hell (2009).

I think this is the cousin of The Goonies’ Sloth.

And despite the story’s outcome which couldn’t possibly have been deduced, the final act was full of bonkers murderous action which left me very entertained.  The closing scene answers the questions why did the professor have a pet chimp?  and is Jennifer’s insect telepathy actually important in this movie?  However, the answers are far from intelligent or reasonable, doing little more than offering weirdly shocking moments in the finale.

I’d recommend that less seasoned horror fans skip this film until they find the insatiable desire to see everything (much as I do).

John, here!  This week I will be your Bad Movie Tuesday guest writer and together we will endure…

MY CALL:  Not sure how the teenage girl target audience felt about this.  But I’m a 32 year old certified bro and this bored me to tears.  But maybe if you grew up on Hannah Montana, this is for you.  IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH:  Ugh…other movies filled with puppies and sunshine made for teenage girls.

Okay, so I only watched this because I told MFF-founder Mark that I would NEVER watch Blue Crush 2. Days later I received it from Amazon and I was almost certain there was a shipping error until I saw the note that read “Surfs up! Aloha! From Mark.”  He secretly bought it for me from Amazon as a gag gift and now I feel obligated to watch and review it.  I mean, look, he even sprung the extra few bucks to get me the blu-ray.

See.  This was a legit gift!  I did not buy, rent or in any way desire to see this.

So Dana (Sasha Jackson; China Bigfoot: Legend of the Yeren), an 18 year old valley girl who desires adventure to her privileged upper class problemless life, sets off to visit South Africa and leaves the continent without telling her father.  Let’s just pause right here.  She just leaves!  She lives with her dad and uses his credit card yet feels no obligation to tell him that she’s going to AFRICA on his dime!  Africa isn’t so safe these days, by the way, especially not for a naïve blonde teenager who may have never left the country or understand different cultures.  Didn’t she see Blood Diamond or Safe House?  Things can get a little rough over there.  Let’s add that it’s not even clear if she’s in high school, college or what.  Is she failing classes due to all these absences?  Will this little irresponsible adventure cost her a chance at getting into a decent college?  And if she’s in college, EVEN WORSE!  This would be catastrophic to her transcripts.  Let’s face it, this girl is simply reckless.  So maybe we should sneer instead of patting her on the back for “being so brave” or “true to herself.” Kids need to learn consequences–meanwhile I wouldn’t trust this girl to parallel park next to my car.

She even looks clueless on the beach.

Right after arriving in South Africa, Dana clashes with a rude local on a bus who then follows her all the way to the beach just to steal her stuff out of spite.  Welcome to Africa, Dana!  Maybe drop the entitled attitude when you’re talking to strange men in Africa.  You’re daddy can’t clean up your mess with legal threats or the swipe of a credit card out here.  And this all happened because she didn’t want to sit next to him on the bus.  What a privileged little…aaargh! I won’t say it.  Whatever, she got what she deserved.  I think the writers wanted me to sympathize with her after being robbed.  But no, this bro says the chick had it coming!

Dana meets Pushy (Elizabeth Mathis; Tron: Legacy) and Tara (Sharni Vinson; You’re Next, Bait).  Dana and Pushy are instant besties but Tara is the standoffish tough girl on the beach.  She’s a pro and she doesn’t like anyone getting in her way, so she immediately clashes with Dana.  As a certified bro I find this so tired.  We all know they’re going to be friends in the end of the movie even if that wouldn’t happen in real life.  This lace and roses goodie movie crap doesn’t fly with me.

So, take a look, bros.  You can sorta’ just tell that this girl probably doesn’t like adding new girls to the group.

Dana seeks to find herself by surfing at all the beaches in some old photos her deceased mother had taken when she had surfed those beaches.  This is her way of connecting with her mother who she never really got to know.  This strikes me as a very sweet thing to do and could make for a cute movie for kids.  So why corrupt it by sneaking away from home and running up your dad’s credit card bill by purchasing a most likely outrageously priced same-day flight to Africa?  And hey, she left for Africa the very same day she decided to go.  So she clearly didn’t get a VISA!!!!!!  I realize this is probably just a minor writing flaw in the story.  But in real life she’d need to wait a week or two for this VISA.  So, in order to get to Africa, I’m going with “she’s now a criminal” because she must have snuck onto the plane somehow like a little blonde ninja.  Enjoy your jail time when you get home, Dana.  And say hi to Lindsay Lohan for me.  Maybe you can be cell mates.  Might we add that, forgiving a possible writing flaw, that the guy on the bus stole your bag that would have had your passport, VISA, credit cards and all forms of identification you may have.  So ummmm…have fun at the embassy trying to explain that!

So now after hearing all this, this bro is like “Come on, bro. You can’t be serious with this movie synopsis. It’s gotta’ be totes bogus.”  And then I’m all “Sorry, Bro. THAT–JUST–HAPPENED!!!!”

To add some sense of adventure, Dana and Pushy get mixed up with some ivory poacher–I wasn’t impressed and felt no sense of urgency.  But wait, the poacher is the same guy from the bus that stole her stuff at the beach.  And her love interest is mixed up with the poacher.  And she has some other love interest.  And they try to follow the poacher to get her stuff back.  Is this chick NUTS!?!?!?!  This story is not just running off the rails, but Dana is seriously insane!  Following a poacher in Africa?  This guy will cut off your blonde head and lose no sleep over it!  Haven’t you seen The Last King of Scotland or The Mummy Returns?  It’s all dictators, death squads and undead armies down there!  What’s the next vacation you have planned?  Sun-bathing and partying in Afghanistan?

Yeah.  Great idea.  Right up there with traveling to Africa alone and telling no one where you’re going with any greater specificity than “South Africa.”  Well that narrows it down!

Too create yet more “first world problems “conflict, Dana’s dad eventually tries to track her down in South Africa–I couldn’t have cared less, but I’m sure it would embarrass any teenager in front of her new cool  surfer friends.  But how on Earth did he find her?  She’s living in a lean-to shack on the beach with a bunch of surfing beach hippies with no responsibilities or electricity.  And get this–he’s not even mad.  He’s actually a really tame and understanding guy who’s just happy to see that his daughter is okay.  That in mind, I’ll bet she could have just “asked” him if she wanted to set up an African surfing adventure.  Maybe they could make a bonding experience out of it and avoid dangerous criminals while they’re at it.  This movie is cute and all, but I’d imagine she should face more in the way of consequences.  I’m a Jersey Italian and if I pulled this crap when I was a kid (or even today) I’d get smacked in the mouth every day for a decade.

This movie could have been made for no reasons other than filming girls in teeny bikinis to a fun summer surfin’ soundtrack.  The tensions never feel too tense, the stakes are never too high, the bikini bottoms always ride up too high, the waves are always bodacious and nothing ever feels too serious.  I wasn’t impressed by the surfing stunts either–but maybe that’s just because I’m no surfer and I have no idea what’s actually hard to do.  Or, it’s because I’m a bro, I don’t get this teenage girl stuff and I just don’t care.

By the way, at the end Dana turns down some sort of pro-tour surfing gig, which would have salvaged the bad grade situation she’d be suffering.  Now someone suggested to me that maybe Dana had just graduated from high school and this was her summer before college or after her freshman year.  Actually, not possible!  South Africa is only subtropical and, being in the Southern Hemisphere, has reversed seasons.  So if it was Dana’s summer, it would be too chilly to surf in South Africa.  June to August highs are in the low 60s to low 70s and these girls weren’t wearing wetsuits.  So, congrats, Dana!  You now have no future.  Enjoy working at Hollister for the foreseeable future.

And who offers her the pro gig?  Her arch nemesis.

Proooobably not in the 60s or low 70s that day.  Otherwise those girls would need a sandwich and am Old Navy pullover to stay warm.

In summary, I cannot give this incredibly unrealistic movie my Bro-Stamp of Approval.  All bros should avoid this movie at all cost unless it’s date night and “she” picked the movie.  In which case I’d advise you to just agree that it’s so sweet how Dana connected with her mother.

Thanks for joining me and my Bad Movie Tuesday pick this week.

MY CALL:  Today’s Carrie preserves the legendary performances of the original with contemporary actors and an updated setting.  MOVIES LIKE Carrie:  Only the 1976 original comes to mind.

Let’s just start by fending off critics who just troll for things to criticize.  This is a remake of the 1976 film based on Stephen King’s first novel.  Because the original was powerful an remains effective to this day, some may argue that this is a remake that has no business being made.  I thought that about the 2011 remake (which they claimed was a prequel) The Thing (2011).  However, unlike The Thing, Carrie was remade impressively, honors the original and brings all of the quality to a present day audience that may have never given the time of day to the 36 year old original.

Carrie White (Chloë Grace Moretz; Dark Shadows, Let Me In, The Eye, The Amityville Horror) is an awkward, sheltered, God-fearing 18-year old living with her fanatical zealot of a mother (Julianne Moore; Seventh Son, 6 Souls).  She develops telekinetic powers after being humiliated at school as she comes of age (physiologically).  As a result of her humiliating trauma, she becomes the subject of attention of some clique-y, over-entitled “it” girls leading to a cruel prank that gets way out of hand when after Carrie is asked to prom by a popular boy, they are crowned king and queen of the prom, and Carrie has the time of her life.

The changes from the original were few in this remake.  But the major accomplishment here was modernizing a classic while preserving legendary acting performances with current actors.  Everyone seemed to do a solid job.  Carrie’s classmates were vicious, with a cruelty credibly fueled by entitlement.  Chloë Grace Moretz was impressive, instantly capturing my greatest sympathies.  And Julianne Moore made me shutter almost every time I saw her face; hauntingly insane, often psychotic.  Moore commands most of our nervous attention until the prom scene, when Chloë Grace Moretz shifts gears from great to amazing!

At this point I’d like to pause and address a non-horror victory.  The prom scene was enchanting.  They did such a great job making Carrie’s date seem sweet and attentive.  For about ten minutes we see Carrie coming of age mentally as a beautiful, somewhat confident woman.  She makes friends, has her first dance, enjoys her first embrace from a boy, and feels safe and cared for perhaps for the first time in her life.  I almost wanted the movie to have a happy ending.  No, they really did that good of a job making this scene, well…just so…touching!  It reminded me of my prom and simultaneously made me think “if I should ever have a daughter I hope she has a prom experience like this.”

Well, not entirely like this. This effectively sweet and tender scene primes us for what we all know happens next.  The messy prom finale.  It’s impressive.  Carrie exacts her rage on her classmates to gory ends, sparing the few she knows to be innocent but indiscriminately rending all others.  Her face mixes horror, revenge and, at moments, a karmically reciprocal satisfaction.  The scale is large, the revenge is sweet, and the ending is appropriately sad.  Although, the final few minutes felt forced.

If I had a criticism it would be that Carrie’s telekinesis comes out of nowhere.  It may have justifiably emerged after a traumatic event, but how did this not happen before in her four years of high school or a lifetime with her incredibly psychologically abusive mother?  She also seems to master the power to levels of shocking acuity, which diminishes the frightening rage-like abandon with which she wields her powers in the prom scene.  It seems equal parts meltdown and calculated, instead of entirely meltdown.

But largely this film was AMAZING.  This remake is not only worthy, but a must-see which should stoke young horror fans’ interest in the original.

MY CALL:  77 minutes of impressively nuanced Halloween anthology goodness with diverse effects and expertly interwoven stories.  This movie blows away expectations.  MOVIES LIKE Trick ‘r Treat:  Some other fun, decent and/or clever anthologies include (in order of release date):  Black Sabbath (1963), Tales from the Crypt (1972), The Vault of Horror (1973), Creepshow (1982), Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983), Stephen King’s Cat’s Eye (1985), Creepshow 2 (1987), Tales from the Dark Side: The Movie (1990), Necronomicon: Book of the Dead (1993), Campfire Tales (1997), 3 Extremes (2004), Trick ‘r Treat (2007), Chillerama (2011), Little Deaths (2011), V/H/S (2012), The Theater Bizarre (2012), The ABCs of Death (2013), V/H/S 2 (2013) and The Profane Exhibit (2013).

This fun little Halloween romp includes several interwoven stories.  Unlike most anthologies, all of the stories herein share the same writer and director (Michael Dougherty; only feature film as director).  So, also unlike most anthologies, there is a more consistent level of quality as we move from one short story to the next and there is no obvious beginning or end to each segment–instead they all overlap one another quite well.  So much so, in fact, that some would even argue that this isn’t really an anthology film.  Like in Creepshow, comic-book text boxes flag-post story shifts as light comedy and some downright silliness shine through to keep us smiling.  After all, who said Halloween couldn’t be both gory and light-hearted?  Mixed among the stories is a nice variety: vampires, werewolves, zombies, serial killers and midget monsters.

Here is a brief summary of the stories:

1.  Four girls in cleavage-rich fairy tale costumes go out on Halloween night seeking manly fare.  The girls are played by Anna Paquin (True Blood, Scream 4, Darkness), Rochelle Aytes, Moneca Delain (Lost Boys: The Tribe) and Lauren Lee Smith (Pathology).  Paquin plays the shy virgin among a pack of experienced man-eaters.

Well, as we know, Disney always has been generous in the cleavage department.

Whoa.  There’s a change up.  From innocent school girl (above) to R-rated Van Helsing extra (below).

2.  A bus driver attempts to kill a bus full of mentally disturbed children and sort of succeeds.  This event (which is told as a scary story) is linked to a mean prank that some kids pull.  The kids include Britt McKillip (Mission to Mars) and Jean-Luc Bilodeau (Piranha 3DD).

What’s down there?  I’m guessing a trick.

3+.  The overarching intro-to-closing story observes trick-or-treating and trick-or-treaters or all ages in a pleasant neighborhood.  Pleasant, that is, until people start dying at the hands of a strange diminutive murderer and a kid-killing school principal.  This “story” features really more than one story of its own and the cast features Leslie Bibb (Hell Baby, 7500), Dylan Baker (The Cell, Fido) and Brian Cox (Zodiac, The Ring).

Dylan Baker is pretty handy with a carving knife.  Check it out, fat kid from Bad Santa.

While not “maturely” or seriously presented, the writing felt sound, credible and free of any flaws that would provoke criticism.  Great, in fact, for this kind of movie.  A finer detail in this film is the effective use of jack-o-lanterns as a symbol of death.  Pay attention to what happens after someone blows a jack-o-lantern’s candle out.  Also note that the bus driver and the principal each find themselves in more than one story.  Also pay attention as a murderer’s child dresses as the murder, complete with a blood-stained shirt after murdering someone earlier in the film!  Now that is META!

A fine job was done with the special effects.  There’s no CGI (that I can tell) and every nuance worth showing got plenty of skillful attention.  The gore includes geyser-like vomiting, bloody bodies, severed heads, rubber guts, broken legs with exposed bones, stacks of corpses and a breasty flesh-stripping transformation scene.  I really dug the artistic license taken on the werewolf transformation scene!  It may seem a little dumb to horror fans at first glance, but it was done VERY well and it mingled fantastically with the “girls in slutty costumes” theme; they literally “stripped” off their human skin to reveal the wolf within.  Given the tone of the movie and the scene, it felt perfect.

It saddens me that Michael Dougherty (the man behind this tactful movie) hasn’t done anything in years.  I’d like to think he’s working on his next horror masterpiece.  But I fear he’s fallen into obscurity.

This is far more worthy than any anthologies of the last 20 years in terms of overall quality.  So take the time this Halloween to enjoy this light-hearted masterpiece.

MY CALL:  Stupid, stupid, stupid. Bioengineered oysters make special pearls that are worm eggs that infect people and give them super powers.  Very stupid.  MOVIES LIKE Growth:  There are soooo many better “infection” movies out there: Cabin Fever (2002), Cabin Fever 2 (2009), Splinter (2008), The Ruins (2008), The Thaw (2009), The Thing (1982, 2011), The Bay (2012), The Dreamcatcher (2003), Night of the Creeps (1986), The Puppet Masters (1994), They Live (1988)…any of these would be better choices for movie night.  Well, maybe not Dreamcatcher.

Off the coast of Maine festers the island of Cuttyhunk.  20 years ago this small island served as a Mecca for research in human genetics: “The Human Growth Project.”  Somehow, ground-breaking studies of oysters and special pearls led to a “jump in human evolution”, but also somehow led to a biohazard that wiped out 75% of Cuttyhunk’s population.

Jaime (Mircea Monroe; The Change Up, Tekken, Magic Mike) grew up on the island and her father was involved in the research that created all the problems.  She fled the outbreak which claimed her parents’ lives only to return 20 years later to sell her parents property with her boyfriend Marco (Brian Krause; Sleepwalkers, Charmed), her stepbrother Justin (Christopher Shand; Return to Sleepaway Camp, Hit and Run) and Kristin (Nora Kirkpatrick).  It should come as no shock that there’s no phone reception on Cuttyhunk Island.

For whatever reason, they made Mircea Monroe (playing Jamie) LESS attractive for this role.  Not sure why.

They uncover Cuttyhunk’s long suppressed secrets.  Their experiments somehow created a new parasitic worm which is linked to Jamie’s past.  There are town council members up to shady business, culty locals dressed in black and hooded strangers skulking around in the woods watching them.  Jamie struggles to escape the pursuit of locals who know that she has inherited more than she could have imagined.

The parasites grant their hosts telepathy, heightened strength and reflexes and an accelerated sex drive.  What’s that?  Why the increased sex drive?  Is that how the parasite is transmitted to new hosts?  Nope.  That’s just a typical staple that direct-to-DVD horrors rely on just like their 80s video-era predecessors.  These worms bore through flesh as easily as CGI effects can illustrate.  As for the enhanced strength, infected people can punch chunks of bark and wood off trees like Bane demolishes cement pillars every time Batman dodges his punches.

Yes.  I agree.  That’s ridiculous.

How experiments in human genetics generated mutant worms that grant humans powers is beyond my understanding and sounds like a 10-year old wrote this story.  They’re also vulnerable to salt and the island is surrounded by salt water, which smacks of a child’s disturbing fascination with slowly killing slugs.  Was this written by a child?

“Wait, what? Why would the worms be vulnerable to salt?”

So…Cuttyhunk, huh?  Interesting name.  Sounds like what your body looks like when the little wormy parasites of this movie are done with you.  Speaking of which, the creature effects are largely obvious C-grade CGI when worms are encountered en masse, but they’re entertaining and the worms were given more personality than simply a “copy and paste”-generated blurry swarm.  Shots of individual worms seem to be more B-grade CGI and reveal more intricate details of the parasite’s odd morphology, which look like miniature versions of the alien worm parasites from The Dreamcatcher (2003).  The worms take many forms throughout the movie, even earthworms, and this is a sign on inconsistency and not creativity.

SPOILER ALERT!  In the end Jamie discovers that her father is like “the head infected guy” on the island.  How does she recognize him after 20 years?  He’s wearing the same shoes he wore the day her mother died.  You got that?  He’s been wearing the same shoes for 20 years.  Who does that?  How old is your oldest pair of shoes?

So here are some big questions for the child-minded writer of this movie. 

1) Since the worms (and subsequently their hosts) want to spread the infection, why didn’t they just leave the effing island?  The ending suggests that our hero escapes by boat and cannot be followed by the infected.  Can’t the infected just get in another effing boat?  WTF?!?!?  Has no one required major medical attention and needed to leave the island (perhaps while infected)?  Evidently not!  Not one broken bone in 20 years.  Healthiest town ever.

2) We also learn that all of the human genetic enhancement stuff started with bioengineered oysters that make  special pearls, which we later learn are EGGS for these worms.  WHAT!?!?!?!  So oysters compact sand from the sea floor into living worm eggs of a new species that parasitizes humans and gives them special powers and  a repulsion for seamanship, leaving them bound on the island with the stupid name?  Is that what happened?  REALLY?!?!?!  By what insane reasoning does that make any sense?  It’s official.  This stupid movie is stupider than any stupid thing I’ve seen this year by a stupid lot.

“Wait, what? The worms hatch from eggs produced by oysters, which live in salt water, and the worms are vulnerable to AND afraid of salt water?  FML!!!”

This was writer/director Gabriel Cowan first solo non-documentary directorial debut.  His fledgling status is clearly evidenced by his childishly uncreative choices regarding the symptoms of infection, the inconsistent depiction of the monstrous parasites, and his outlandish story.  Don’t watch his stupid movie unless you’re in the mood to laugh at what he apparently believed to be a credible horror movie.