Clarky's Review: Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood & Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan

I'm not sure how to review these films. To be honest I think I enjoyed Part V and VI more than these two outings. Sometimes a film is so bad that they are good, sometimes they are so bad they never come back round to being good. That's kind of how I feel about Parts VII and VIII. Maybe I had just had too much Jason Voorhees in the past few weeks.

These films are the film definitions of guilty pleasures, like an Entenmann's chocolate cake washed down with a large vanilla coke. The thing is, you can only really handle that once every now and then. If you were to have it every day you would be classified as a sex beast.

Last Thursday I think I had finally gorged myself on Jason. Jason must now be in his 60's given the time line of the series, and at times his age shows! That's not to say that I didn't take some joy out of these films, it was Jason Voorhees after all. But I think it was too much of the same thing. Each of the films hit the same beats that those that came before with some added twists. Part VII has a Carrie rip off in the form of Tina Shepard and in Part VIII Jason moves to Manhattan. I say he takes Manhattan, he's there for all of 5 minutes, but thats enough to name the film after it. It should really be called Jason takes a cruise.

Jason's diseased body is one of the highlights in Part VII, along with some of the great fashion. And his face is also getting more diseased!

Not great additions to the series (but then none of them really are) but more of the same. If you love Jason, you will love these.

Ally's Review: Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood & Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan

Hmmm... I think I overdid the fix of Jason Voorhees. It turns out that you shouldn’t do back to back weeks of Friday the 13th double bills. After watching Part 5 and 6 last week, we wanted to watch the next two and it was too much. Like a kid who wants more sweeties and then feels a bit sick afterwards...

I’ll try to put that aside and rate the films against the rest of the franchise. You can’t really rate these films as independent subjects because they are uniquely - and wonderfully - awful. By part 7 we have a new foe for Jason: Tina Shepherd. She has telekinetic powers that come out when she is stressed. So her psychiatrist decides to try to induce it by taking her to Crystal Lake. As you would. It’s a nice twist on the franchise, and mixed in with the usual elements, it gives this film a bit of originality.

Part 8 is basically Jason on a boat. It has some nice touches and a few good laughs - but it’s probably the worst sequel since part 5. It’s worth seeing for arguably the best Jason kill in the franchise (Jason as the pugilist) and it depicts Manhattan as literally the worst place on Earth. I could do without the near rape scene, and the drug sequence is ludicrous. It's like the director wanted to take the film into a gritty drama for about 10 minutes and it falters badly. Overall, it’s a decent film (relatively speaking), but it ranks quite low in the franchise for me.

For the record... if I had to rank the sequels in order it would be Part 4, Part 2, Part 6, Part 3, Part 7, Part 8 and (bringing up the rear) Part 5. I’ve not seen Jason goes to Hell, and Jason X is kind of its own beast (although I do love it). Perhaps next season we might get round to reviewing the rest of them. But for now, I think we all need a little break from Jason.

Fin's Review: Friday The 13th: A New Beginning & Friday The 13th Part VI: Jason Lives

We had our last horror club meet up of the 2011 season on Thursday and by way of celebrating the year past, we finished where we started by once more visiting the Friday the 13th saga. For the first time we had a double bill starting with Friday the 13th: A New Beginning and following up with Friday The 13th: Jason Lives. I'm going to keep my review pretty short this week for a couple of reasons: firstly, I figure if you are considering watching the fith and sixth instalment in this franchise you are probably a big fan already and therefore don't need a big review, and secondly the quality on show in Part V is seriously poor and probably doesn't warrant a proper review.

Friday the 13th: A New Beginning

The fifth film in the Friday the 13th saga is undoutedly the worst film in the series, something which is not helped by coming after Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter - to my money, the best film in the entire series. This film is really really bad. It combines a poor story, poor acting, lame humour and a twist ending which until I watched Switchblade Romance was the worst I had ever seen. A New Beginning continues the story of Tommy Jarvis, Jason's main nemesis, to whom we were introduced in the fourth film. Tommy, due to his horrific experience as a child, is sent to what must be the worst psychiatric unit maybe ever and madness ensues.

In fairness to Danny Steinmenn, he does attempt to bring a new direction to the franchise. However, it ultimately fails. As a result of this change in direction the film makes little sense in relation to the rest of the saga and you would not be missing anything if you went straight from Part IV to Part VI.

Friday the 13th: Jason Lives

Just when you were starting to worry about the quality of the franchise, things get back on track in Part VI. Unlike Part V, Jason Lives is a strong addition to the franchise. Director Tom McLoughlin makes a wise decision to disregard all that happens in Part V and the film works because of this.

We start with our old friend Tommy Jarvis digging up the remains of Jason Vorhees in a graveyard, in the middle of the night, during a thunderstorm - an incredibly misjudged move. Jason is resurrected, in the best opening scene in any of the films, when his long-dead corpse is struck by lightning. As a result of this lightning strike, Jason's powers are taken to a new level and as a result some of the kills in this film are truly inventive, a plus point for any fan of the series. On top of the usual mahyem we are introduced to fast-cracking and ultimately noble Sheriff Michale Garris, a fine addition to the cast of characters that inhabit this particular horror universe.

Part VI ends with Jason chained to the bottom of Crystal Lake, but it doesn't take a genius to realise he won't be trapped for long. Neither of these films are going to win any awards, but buy into them (particularly Part VI) and you will enjoy the strange, endearing charm of this enduring horror frachise.

Clarky's Review: Friday the 13th: A New Beginning & Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives

These may well be two of the best "worst" films I have ever seen.

Whilst it has been noted that A New Beginning, the fifth film in the canon, tries to take a different approach there is enough stuff here to keep it enjoyable. First of all there are more 2 dimensional characters than you can shake a stick at, some of whom don't even get a line, who are introduced to the proceedings with the sole purpose of being fodder for "Jason". The director, Danny Steinmann, was instructed to do two things with this film - deliver a shock, scare or kill every 8 minutes and turn Tommy into the new Jason, and he certainly delivers on kills, and there are a couple of shocks (mainly due to the fact that you're not expecting them given what has come before).

The film opens with Corey Feldman reprising his role as Tommy Jarvis. The film was apparently originally written for Feldman, but he was unable to film it due to his commitments with The Goonies. I don't think he will ever have had a better career move since! From this opening dream sequence we get or first unintentional laugh with the coffin barely buried 6 inches under, never mind 6 feet.

And the laughs keep coming. Whether its by inventive death, shocking dialogue, a ridiculous mental institute and lack police chief or the even more ridiculous twist ending, you can't help but smile at how bad this all is.

Probably the worst film, but I think I enjoyed this more than the first outing in that at its so bad it is good. However, I did feel like it was a missed opportunity to set up Tommy Jarvis as the successor to Jason from the start of the film and look into his character more. Its hard to tell who the main character is in this film, Tommy Jarvis only says 24 words but Reckless Reggie has the bulk of the screen time! (even if he does scream like a girl)

Second up was Jason Lives. He's back (the man behind the mask) and he's out of control. He's back (the man behind he mask) and he's crawled out of his hole.

The first death this film blows is to the storyline set up in the last film. Due to a fanboy revolt (they even had fanboys in the 80's, although without the internet I'm not sure how they vented their frustration, there must have been a lot of angry letters to Paramount) the idea of Tommy Jarvis becoming a killer was binned and the last 5 minutes of A New Beginning written of as a dream sequence (so it was a dream within a dream!). To be honest, you could just miss out part 5 altogether.

To be fair, the re-introduction of Jason gives the series the jump start it needs after part 5. Like a lightning bolt to the heart it resuscitates the series and like Jason its back bigger and stronger than before. With his machete back in hand Jason racks up no less than 18 kills in the film, its more than any of the others that have come before.

Sure there are some ridiculous plot points and storylines, but there is some cracking dialogue

"Hit the noise and the cherry's"

and

"You'll be wearing your testicles for earrings"

Being two of my favourite ones of the entire series so far.

There are also some genuinely inventive shots and the series is back to what it does best. Sure there are some unintentional laughs, but you genuinely cheer with every death (writing this down I am taking a long, hard look at myself. I think I may have seen to many horror films, I'm looking forward to the summer break).

Another worthy addition to the canon if you like all things Jason. If you've not enjoyed whats come before then I would avoid these bad boys. But if you revel in the ongoing saga of Jason Voorhees then Jason Lives will have you cheering for more. The only negative being that it is the only Friday the 13th to feature no nudity. All we get is a comedy sex scene in a camper van and a full blown camel toe.

In conclusion I can't wait for the last 7 and 8 next week!

Ally's Review: Friday the 13th: A New Beginning & Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives

We decided on a double header of parts 5 and 6 for this weeks viewing. What can I say about these films? The Friday the 13th franchise is a guilty pleasure of mine. It's hard to review these films because they are pretty awful, but that doesn't change the fact that I really enjoy them. The only way to review it is by way of comparison to what has come before. Although if you are seriously thinking about watching parts 5 & 6 then chances are you have a good idea of what to expect.

Part 5 sees Tommy Jarvis return as a haunted adult, who moves to the worst psychiatric facility in the world. For some inexplicable reason 'Jason' returns to kill lots of the patients. Even for a Friday the 13th film the premise is flimsy. They attempted to resurrect the franchise by going in a different direction and it falls completely flat. You could actually just take part 5 out because 4 and 6 fit together much better. However, if you did that then you'd miss out on some great characters such as Reggie 'Reckless' and his big brother Demon. 2D characters such as these are what makes me enjoy the franchise so much. So in that regard, part 5 has some merit.

Part 6 decides that Part 5 never happened and the real Jason returns. Thank goodness. 2 shots of lightning to the chest not only resurrect Mr Voorhees but give him even more strength. His kills in this film are particularly swift and ruthless. It follows the same premise as pretty much every Friday film - Jason kills a lot of people at a Summer camp. If I had to place it in the franchise I'd say that it's better than part 3 but not as good as part 4. However it is worth it just for the kill in the RV. There are also some actual proper nice shots in this film too.

These aren't films that I can necessarily recommend, if you have seen part 4 then there is probably a good chance you are a big enough geek to watch more. Part 5 is really awful and unnecessary (but still funny)… Part 6 is a good addition to the franchise.

Fin's Review: Switchblade Romance

I cannot remember any film that has left me not only as frustrated but as angry as Switchblade Romance. I have never seen a film implode in such a catastrophic way as this. I have never seen such an excellent film be so thoroughly torn apart and ruined by so stupid and unnecessary an ending and after the anger died away I just felt regret for what could have been for Alexandre Aja and this film.

This is the most difficult film that I have had to review for the blog, mainly due to the unique circumstances of this film. If I had one piece of advice for anybody that is about to watch this film, it is to turn it off around the 65 minute mark. If you do this, you will have watched what I think is one of the most exciting slasher films for years. However, if you ignore this advice and watch the whole film, you will find its excellence totally overshadowed and ultimately worthless next to the sheer crappiness of the ending, which ruins everything that goes before it. This is where the difficulty in reviewing this film comes in: how do you review a film that is really excellent for 95% of its running time and laughably bad for the remaining 5%? Ultimately, you have to view the film as a whole and due to the ending the whole project is a failure, but perhaps like no other film I have seen. I was left dreaming about what might have been if Aja had not totally lacked the courage of his convictions in keeping this film simple in the best traditions of the slasher genre.

When Clarky brought this film to the table on Thursday I have to say I was not enthusiastic; after watching Inside the previous week, another gore-drenched uber-violent French film was not what I was after. However, only a few minutes into this film it became clear that, aside from shared nationality, Inside and Switchblade Romance have little in common other than the quality of film making on show.

The film opens with Marie and Alex, two college friends visiting Alex's family's country home. The backwoods of France replace the backwoods of America in this flick but old creaky houses and isolated fields created the same creepy atmosphere, regardless of which country they happen to be in. As with the nod to Texas Chainsaw Massacre, in the country setting there is not much new in this film and I don't mean that as a criticism. Aja takes many of the aspects of the slasher genre we all know and love adds some nice touches of his own, combines this with top quality visuals and sound, and creates a really engaging film.

The first thing that hits you when watching this film is the quality of the filming - the French fields look amazing as Alex and Marie drive through them on the way to the house. Everything is fresh and bright and sun-dappled. This is juxtaposed to great effect with our first view of the killer's truck - it is dark and grimy and creates an atmosphere of real menace. This first view of the killer is for my money one of the creepiest introductions to a horror villain I have seen in a long time.

Coupled with the great visuals is even better sound production. Every creak and crunch is amplified to give the viewer the heightened sensory awareness that a person feels under great stress and fear. This is particularly effective when Marie is hiding under the bed during the killer's first assault. This scene is an interesting example of a technique Aja uses to great effect in this film - by focusing on the sound and placing us alongside the character under the bed, we hear the carnage but don't actually see it. This hearing but not seeing technique is really effective and is continued in the obscured view of the killer. Aja only gives us snatched views of the fiend but the little we do see is terrifying.

The killer in Switchblade Romance is perfection. He is at once both terrifying and really hideous. He is dirty and sweaty and it is not hard to imagine the smell of his vile presence. He is also perhaps more grounded in reality than many slasher villains, never becoming a caricature or a supernatural creature that the viewer can in a way laugh at and support. Instead, Aja's creation is a combination of many of the features of real life serial killers and is truly abhorrent.

After the initial assault on Alex's house where Alex is kidnapped, Marie decides to track the killer down to rescue her friend and seek justice. At this point the film flips from an excellent home invasion film to an equally strong chase movie. As a result of the killer's action in the house and the strong character portrayed by Marie, we really get behind her and when justice is finally served it is a truly satisfying viewing experience.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is where this film should have ended. If it had, Aja would have created a slasher film right out of the top drawer with tension, scares, action and suspense. However, for reasons known only to him, Aja adds a twist that is maybe the most ridiculous in film history. It is a twist that adds nothing to the story and when added to what went before makes absolutely no sense. I will not describe it, partly not to 'spoil' the ending but also because it is just too depressing. There cannot be too many directors that in the space of 5 minutes destroy a really excellent piece of work the way Aja does here.

Clarky's Review: Switchblade Romance

Wow. What can I say about this film.

For once I really don't know, I'm still in shock as to what happened on Thursday. And angry. Very, very angry.

This film is almost impossible to rate as it's as if it was directed by two different people. One of which is a horror auteur, riffing on the films that have come before and effectively bringing something fresh to the big screen. The other is a prick. A total and utter bawbag of a man, who manages to undo all the great work done in the first 75 minutes by putting 10 minutes of utter pish on screen that is so out of touch and tone with the rest of the film that you can't believe what you are seeing. Added to this fact that you are given one of the most non-sensical twists of all time that even M Night Shyamalan would balk at.

I'll focus on the positives first. The original French name is far more fitting - High Tension. They're not joking, there are some genuinely unnerving, tense and creepy shots in here. The "bad guy" is one of the most vile, despicable characters I have seen on screen for a long time, and was perfect. Contrary to one of the issues I had with Inside, Switchblade Romance has the courage to carry out its convictions (for the first 75 minutes) and you don't see his eyes at all. You see glimpses of his face but not all of it, making him seem less human, which is a good thing given what he's doing, but also more terrifying.

I'm not sure if I've become desensitised, especially in recent weeks, but don't believe the hype about this film being overly gory. Yes there is some gore, but a lot of the things happen off screen. And thats what makes it so scary. Aja appears to know that the true horror is in the viewers mind. And by alluding to certain things, or hearing the screams of camera the viewers mind is free to roam to its darkest corners and is ultimately more terrifying than anything that could be shown on screen. Given these subtle touches it is even more incredible to me what happens next.

The twist ending is totally uncalled for, cheats the viewer out of one of the great retributions of recent memory and contradicts everything that came before. As much as people may not like Shyamalan's twists at least they are in keeping with the rest of his film. Everything builds towards the twist and if you look back you can see it fits into the storyline, and in most cases you can watch them again seeing the story from a different perspective due to the added knowledge you have.

Watch Switchblade Romance again and I reckon you will be even more angry and dismayed with what Aja has done. All the effective work that he has done previously is blown out of the water by the monstrosity that is the last 10 minutes, plot strands fall to pieces and, most criminal of all, the effective "boogie man" suddenly becomes a caricature of himself and laughable. It also reduces one of my favourite parts of the film to nothing.

This being the fact that Marie is spot on for the first 75 minutes. Typically when watching other horror movies, look at last week's To Let for a prime example, you are screaming at the TV and balking at how ridiculous the decisions of the protagonist are. In this film I was catching up with her. Nothing typifies this more than the scene where she tidies the room and dries the sink at the start to make it look as if the room is unoccupied. This was genius in my opinion. Here we had a female character who was at the top of her game and yet was still being outdone by this mass murdering maniac. It was terrifying. And again, to be cheated out of this by the "twist" ending hurt all the more.

I honestly don't think I have ever been more disappointed by the ending of a film in my life. There have been worse films, but given what has come before it was almost too much to bear on Thursday night.

If you watch this film please do me favour, turn it off after 75 minutes and you will be treated to a gem of a horror movie, and one of the most effective slasher movies in the past 10 years. If you don't, you may find yourself watching the most ridiculous horror film of the decade that will disappoint as much as it befuddles you.

Ally's Review: Switchblade Romance

It’s not often that I want to meet the director of a film so that I can shout abuse at them. The only other director, before this film, was George Lucas. A few days after watching Switchblade Romance and I still can’t grasp what happened at the end. I can only assume that the director had a breakdown right at the end of filming, or perhaps someone held a gun to his head and instructed him to ruin the movie. They are the only reasonable explanations I have come up with.

As Fin and Clarky have both said, if you stop it before the twist then you will feel very satisfied with the selection of this movie. Until the twist I was thinking that Switchblade Romance (terrible title aside) was probably the freshest slasher movie I’d seen in a very long time. I was thoroughly impressed and I was all set to place it amongst the best horror movies of the decade.

The villain of the movie was fantastic. He was ugly, disgusting and absolutely relentless. Just when you think he’s been tricked or stopped... he regains the upper hand. I also love that you don’t get a clear shot of his face in the movie (pre-twist anyway) I thought that was a great touch. He combines all the best traits of a slasher villain and moulds them into something new and exciting.

There are other things to admire. The acting, the story, the sound effects, the lighting, cinematography... they are all very good. There is really very little not like about it until the end. But my goodness... the end is just so remarkably bad - and totally nonsensical - that it wipes out all the good will that I had towards the film and director. I’d recommend that people watch it just to see how suddenly a movie can be ruined. I’ve never seen anything like it in any genre. I’d just love to know what Aja was thinking! Has he watched the final cut of this movie and thought “Wowzer! This twist is inspired, people are going to love this”... surely not? If he did then he is even crazier than the person locked up at the end of the movie.

This film was heading to a comfortable place in my top 20 of the movies watched at Horror Club, but now it will have to banished to the depths beside such turkey’s as Drag Me to Hell and The Host. A real shame.

Fin's Review: To Let

Anyone who has been following horror over the last few years will know that Spain is where it's at. From [REC] to The Orphanage, Spanish directors are making films of heart and intelligence, not to mention balls-out scares that Hollywood directors can't touch. I was therefore very excited when '6 films To Keep You Awake' came through the letter box. This is a collection of six short films highlighting some of the best horror film makers that Spain has to offer. My first choice from this box set was To Let a film by the director of [REC] - one of my favourite films in years - Jaume Balaguero.

Despite the fact that that To Let had a small budget and was made for TV, the skill of Balaguero and the actors involved ensure that it never seems cheap. By maintaining a small cast and a limited location Balaguero avoids some of the pitfalls associated with small budget films. Balaguero established in [REC] how scary dark, brooding Spanish apartment blocks can be and To Let is no different.

The film opens with a young couple looking for a flat. After numerous disappointments they have responded to an ad for a large and reasonably-priced flat. After getting lost, they finally arrive in a weird run-down area of the city to view the flat. From very early on in the film the one major downside of the film surfaces and that is the stupid and at times bizarre behaviour exhibited by the two main characters. This starts when on the walk up the stairs to the flat they see decapitated mannequin body parts lying around the stairs and hear the dries of a distressed baby, yet still go on with the viewing. You soon realize that these characters are pretty stupid - as much as this is hardly a surprise in a horror film, these characters take it to a new level and at times come close to making the whole premise of the film silly. For example, there a number of occasions when the characters have opportunities to try and escape but don't, which is particularly bizarre as the main 'baddy' is a 50+ year old woman yet the male protagonist can't find it in him to simply attack her. However, good horror films can often make you forget how ludicrous some aspects of the story are while drawing you into the action and this is true of To Let.

Despite the one major flaw I mentioned above, I really enjoyed this film. Balaguero creates a creepy, compelling drama that is built upon a really scary premise and keeps you gripped until the credits roll. Along the way he introduces some really unsetteling images and situations. The main villian of the piece is one of the strangest and scariest characters I have seen in a while and the way she interacts with her 'tenants' is really unnerving. All in all a very decent and enjoyable horror flick and at just over an hour long well worth a watch.

Clarky's Review: To Let

We seem to be going in cycles this season. We had two weeks in the row of D'Argento films a few weeks ago, and this week we had our second film with a pregnant protagonist in two weeks. Whether this says something about how much horror we have watched over the past couple of years that we are now delving into such extremes is for you to judge.

Fin and I first came across To Let earlier this year at a cult film class run by Edinburgh Council. We had decided to attend in order to widen our horizons and hopefully to uncover some unknown gems for future horror club outings. So it was wide eyed excitement that we sat down one evening to watch the first feature by Jaume Balaguero, one of the masterminds behind Rec - one of our collective favourites at HC in the 2009/10 season. This seemed to be exactly what we were looking for and so I was eagerly looking forward to Fin bringing this movie to the table.

First things first, there are a lot of down right stupid moves by some of the people involved in this movie. And whilst this was frustrating it also made the movie more enjoyable. For the first time in a while I was properly shouting at the characters on screen. As a seasoned horror veteran I knew that the creepy letting agent wouldn't give up just because she lost her hand and the fact that the main characters were so oblivious to this enraged me as a critic.
But as a horror fan, it took me back to when you first started watching horror and you couldn't help but talk to the TV screen as the decision making of the protaganists became more and more obtuse and incredulous. Although at one time being cliched in the Scream aftermath of post modernism it felt like a breath of fresh air to sit down and watch some idiots run about an apartment block and get themselves into more trouble - SPOILER - quite why Mario frees the chained up mentalist after he has tried to attack his girlfriend is beyond me.



Beyond this my only gripes were the double flashback at the beginning that seemed pointless and confusing and the fact that I think a couple of the scares could have been timed and scored better to have a bigger impact - particularly in the shower (however, the build up was excellent). But these are small gripes when looking at the film as a whole. It may not be a terrifying edge of your seat horror, but there are enough creepy moments and characters to warrant giving this a shot.

It is also clear to see the origins of Rec from this film, and for that alone it is worth a watch (Its fair to say that I will never be staying in a Spanish apartment block - the list of things I can do is getting smaller every week). A creepy, effective little thriller, with a sound horror premise that is much bigger and better than its made for TV appearances.

Ally's Review: To Let

I had absolutely no expectations when Fin brought To Let to the table. When I learned that Fin was choosing a film from the same director as [Rec], I began to anticipate something a bit special. [Rec] is in the photo finish for my favourite horror film of the last decade. I think that it is absolutely spot-on in every way. This film was made before [Rec] and you can see some similar elements in this movie. The overall impression that I got from To Let was that this was done by a director who was just learning exactly how to create a great piece of horror. It’s a bit rough around the edges compared to REC. That's not to say that it isn't a good film in its own right.

Firstly, the director knows how to use an apartment block to add tension and creepiness. He takes this skill to another in [Rec], but we also see his brilliance here too. I also thought the story was excellent. I loved the premise of the insane woman, forcing people to stay in the apartment. She’s incredibly creepy and you want someone to smack her with shovel the whole film. The movie is very short, but it zips along well and there are few moments that don’t aid the story in some way.

The most flawed element of the movie is that the characters continually fail to dispatch their tormentor. You will find it impossible not to scream at them as they dawdle around, failing to seize their clear opportunity to escape. I suppose there is something very classic about this device, but somehow it misfires here – they kind of deserve to be recaptured or stopped, because they are so slow and weak (especially the husband: the softest man in any movie ever made).

There are some good set pieces on display, and the creepiness and frights are at a solid level. Ultimately though, my lasting impression from the movie was that it wasn’t quite there yet. Several of the jumps misfire when they could have worked superbly with better timing. This is the best example of what I meant about the director learning on the job. He hadn’t mastered the horror genre by this movie, he was still cutting his teeth. It was really good to see it because of that, so that you can see how he progressed with his skill. If I watched this movie without knowing anything about who directed it then I think I would have still enjoyed it, but I probably wouldn't have given it another moments thought. I think I feel more positive towards it because of how much I love [Rec].

Worth seeing for those who want to see flashes of brilliance from a director who would then put it all together later in his career. For anyone else? I’d probably still recommend it: it’s a solid film, although it won’t bowl anyone over.

Fin's Review: Inside

A critic reviewing The Texas Chainsaw Massacre for the first time described the film as a 'scab-picking of the human spirit'. I include this quote not because I agree with it - I feel that you can defend The Texas Chainsaw Massacre on a number of levels - but because it is indicative of a much wider feeling many people have towards horror films. As a fan of the genre you spend a lot of time defending it, both from people who view the whole genre as nihilistic and psychologically damaging and from those who simply view it as weird. For the majority of time this defence is easy; I could talk for hours about the positive and life affirming message of The Exorcist, the artistic flare and vision of Dario Argento, the emotional power of films such as The Orphange and Let The Right One In or even the pure mindless fun of Friday The 13th... I could go on and on. However, there are times when you are presented with films that are clearly abhorrent and do seem to revel in the humiliation and degradation of the human condition - films such as The Hostel and Cannibal Holocaust spring to mind. There are finally a third type of film: the horror films which are perhaps the most challenging for an advocate of the genre. These are the films that you feel truly ambivalent towards and which make you question the validity and worth of the entire horror canon. Ally's choice on Thursday, the French horror Inside, was one such film.

I had heard a lot of buzz about this film in the last few years with Inside topping the lists of best horror film of the decade a number of times. Many horror critics had described this film as one of the scariest films in years and as result anticipation was high on Thursday night. Ultimately I did not like this film and do not think it deserves much of the plaudits it is receiving. I think the most important reason that I did not like this film was that it was simply not scary. There are really only two scenes that were creepy one right at the beginning of the film and the other the final shot the film squeezed between these two moments was poor. Critics who have dismissed this film have described it as a gorno a sub-section of horror that has absolutely no worth and which has been really damaging to the development of the genre. I disagree with this assessment and feel that it is unfair to include this film as a gorno it is much better than that. Whereas gorno films focus on human suffering to the exclusion of story or acting often with a heavy misogynist undertones and unlike traditional horror films have absolutely nothing to say beyond the sadism and pain on screen. Inside was much better than this it was really well shot and the lighting was fantastic and the acting performances were universally excellent. The story focusing on loss and grief was portrayed brilliantly by both protagonists. However despite these positive points the fact that many consider this film gorno highlights the fact that at times the film comes dangerously close to this description.

This film had not been on for long on Thursday night before I realised that I couldn't wait for it to be over. Never a good sign. Largely this was due to the violence on screen, not necessarily because of its graphic nature but because of the excessive use of pointless violence. It became boring very quickly. The issue of violence is a tricky one in horror films and it can seem odd to criticize one film for being violent when almost all horror movies are violent. However, there is violence to advance and enhance the story, and there is violence for violence's sake.

It is much easier to make a gory graphic film than a scary film with an engaging story, and sometimes I think viewers and directors confuse the two. I can deal with violence in a horror film if it is used as part of the story and has a purpose. The violence in Inside was so excessive and constant that once the shock passed it became frustrating. I think this highlights a serious point about the film: ultimately, it has absolutely nothing to say. Once you look past the undoubted technical skill of both the actors and directors, what are you left with is a film with a paper-thin story that tries to overcome this by constant graphic meaningless violence.

Would I recommend this film? No. There too many great horror films to waste your time with this gallic gore fest.

Clarky's Review: Inside

I was intrigued to see what Ally brought to the table this week after talking it up as his most balls out choice. Given that he had previously brought The Texas Chain Saw Massacre to the table I wasn't sure what to expect. Was this going to be another Ally double bluff and we would be watching Ghostbusters, or had he sourced a snuff movie from some dodgy website. It turned out that the film was more comparable to the latter unfortunately.

Inside was certainly a balls out movie and is unflinching in its approach to horror. Whilst, I am happy to watch anything that is put in front of me I find the current trend of torture horror is not for me. It's not that I have a problem with what is on screen necessarily, its more that the torture seems to be the main point of the film and the horror aspect. How exactly filmmakers can justify that showing one disgusting scene after another is horror is beyond me. A good horror has nuance, it get's inside your head and affects your most primal instincts, but most of all it is an art form. Sure you could argue that making someone squirm is making them react to what is shown on screen on the most basic level, but is that enough to classify you as a horror film. I've watched documentaries on surgery that have made me squirm but I wouldn't tell my friends that I had seen a cutting edge horror movie or bring it to horror club!

Horror movies need to be more than that in my opinion. It has to have some heart and soul, and the terror needs to come from something else. The gore should be a reaction to the plot moving forward rather than the cause.

Inside tries very hard to achieve this but doesn't quite achieve it. I'm not sure whether part of this was due to the fact that Ally and Fin built the film up so much that I was expecting the most wizard horror film of horror club to date, or if it is a genuine failing on the part of the filmmakers.

In my opinion the film started excellently and I found the pregnant women aspect a little much but an interesting take for a horror film. It certainly plays to your base fears of survival and vulnerability. For years filmmakers have played upon this aspect (just look at The Night of the Hunter last week) so in these days of taking everything to the nth degree I suppose it was only a matter of time before a foetus became the protagonist!

I also enjoyed the brisk pace of the first 15 minutes, setting up the story efficiently and with an impending feeling of dread. With the first few scenes in the house I thought we had another The House of the Devil on our hands. Every shot was filled with dark corners daring your eyes to flit away as you felt like something was lurking in the background. Indeed, the first shot of Beatrice Dalles character inside the house is one of the best shots I have seen at horror club this year, if not ever, both in terms of technical ability and of tension. If the film carried on like this I'm sure that I would be writing that this was my new number one film.

Instead the tone of the movie changes in an instant and not for the better. From what appeared to be the beginning of a slow assault of terror it quickly moved into an actiony gore fest. I can't help but feel that if the filmmakers had kept the identity of the mystery visitor a secret for longer and had kept her outside the house for most of the film the better this movie would have been.

There were some impressive action scenes, but once they got Sarah locked in the bathroom there was only so many ways the story could go and it felt like, that for the most part, you knew every footstep that the film was going to take. This was the most disappointing thing for me, for whilst this film was clearly innovative in some areas in others the scares were signposted a mile off and the gore became the main focus.

The last 5 minutes the film seems to be on steriods and what came before seems like small fries. Again, it just seemed to be gore, gore then a wee bit more gore, which almost became boring rather than shocking.

Whilst, The House of the Devil last year showed us how to wring the tension out of every scene by playing with peoples preconceptions of horror and well known horror tropes, Inside seems to abide by them after the first 15 minutes and undid any goodwill it had built up. Whilst I would say that my body was tense for a few scenes, this was nothing compared to The House of the Devil and at least 80% of these scenes were due to gore rather than being scared. Inside just doesn't have the scares to back up the gore unfortunately.

I'm glad Ally brought this to the table, there were a couple of scenes of pure dread, at least 1 big jump and one off the most unsettling closing shots I have seen in a while that is sure to stick with you once the credits roll. I may not have enjoyed the film at the time, but 4 days later the film is still fresh in my mind and it certainly caused a lot of discussion after the initial viewing on Thursday night. And although I don't think it was scary enough would be lying if I said I didn't feel a bit uncomfortable going to bed on Thursday in the flat by myself!

Ally's Review: Inside

I thought I'd bring something different to the mixer this week, choosing a film that I'd heard quite a bit of buzz about. I had been thinking about selecting it for a while after seeing it atop of a list of the best horror movies of the decade - but I was reluctant because it sounded pretty full on. I'm not the bravest horror fan in the world, and there have been several films at horror club where I've covered my eyes for a good portion of it - and I knew going in that this film would probably be in that category.

Inside is a very challenging film to watch. It's one of the most violent movies that I've ever seen and that's not really an aspect of horror that floats my boat. I like the comical violence of a slasher movie, and I don't mind the occasional severed limb if it doesn't dominate the movie. I like my horror with tension and frights, not graphic violence. If you read our 'origin of horror club' section you'll see that none of us are into gorno. For me, it's a sub genre of horror that has absolutely no merit. This film is a little too classy to be categorised as a gorno movie, but it walked a fine line. I'll happily admit that the final scene was one that I couldn't watch, it was way beyond my limits. Having said that, although the final shot was absolutely horrifying it was also quite remarkable too.

Even a few days after watching I'm not entirely sure what I think of this movie. It's really well acted, there are some moments of brilliance and it definitely has a depth to it. I was very impressed by the performances of the two stars, who really did an excellent job of conveying the aching sense of loss they both individually carried. There are also some brilliantly crafted shots that represent the best of horror. It's a very stylish film and I think that the team behind it have real potential to go on and make other quality films.

But the overriding impression of the film is the inescapable level of violence. For me, it's just too full on. It's unflinching in its brutality and realism, and I found myself wanting the film to end about half way through. I don't regret the choice because I think it was good to see what my limits are for horror, but I definitely found them in this film. If you are completely numb to violence then this is a very well made movie and it is worth watching. However, if you are anything like me then you'll just find it a bit too much. I definitely won't be recommending it to anyone I know, just in case they think I'm a psychopath as a result.

A very strong film... just a little too strong for my tastes.

Fin's Review: The Night of the Hunter

Clarky went for a change of pace this week and brought a film to the the table that I had always wanted to see but somehow never got round to. Night Of The Hunter was the only the third pre-1960s film that we have watched at Horror Club and, like The Haunting and Them, reminded me that if you put in a bit of effort, watching these old films can really pay off. Ally has for years mentioned how much he likes this film and after watching it for the first time I can see why - I was captivated from start finish. There are a lot of reasons I liked this film, which I will discuss, but it is impossible not to start with Robert Mitchum's performance. Mitchum gives a performance - as the self-styled pastor Harry Powell - that must rank as one of the best acting performances ever filmed.

Mitchum's tattooed-fingered, deranged pastor is one of the most frighteningly sinister characters in film history. He is charismatic, charming and truly twisted. He dominates every scene that he is in with his simmering, barely-controlled hate and rage. However what makes Harry Powell so chilling is the way he hides this violence and hate behind a veneer of old-world charm and the smooth talking of a con man. Throughout the film Powell manages to seduce both individuals and communities with this charm and the character stands as a warning to look for the man behind the smile. It is Mitchum's character that qualifies Night Of The Hunter as a horror film rather than a drama, and I would argue that Harry Powell is scarier than ten Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers. He is the ultimate false prophet.

I was also weirdly struck by Powell's likeness to Arnold Schwarzenegger's Terminator. This is not of course due to similarity in acting talent, but because the fear both characters create is closely linked to the sense that they are both completely relentless and unstoppable. This is really brought home to great effect when John Harper - who, with his younger sister Pearl, is on the run from Powell - awakes at dawn to see Powell's silhouette cast against the rising sun. Truly sinister.

Night Of The Hunter is a religious allegory about the danger of false prophets and the eternal battle between good and evil, and if Powell represents the evil and damaging side of human nature and faith, the character of Rachel Hunter is his opposite. Rachel represents the best of humanity and faith, in her protection and defence of the weak and her love and forgiveness. The scene where Powell and Rachel sing a hymn at each other is one of the most powerful screen moments I have ever seen. Through their singing we are witnessing a clash between the best and worst of the human condition.

Any the review of this film would be incomplete without mentioning the stunning visuals of the film. There are so many excellent shots it would be hard to pinpoint any particular scene, but by building upon aspects of 1920s expressionism and American Noir the director Charles Laughton creates a true masterpiece.

Clarky's Review: The Night of the Hunter

This week it was my choice for horror club and after the last couple of weeks of Argento I wanted to mix things up. Normally I bring modern(ish) films to the table and my main goal is to be as balls out scary as possible. However, this week I thought I would change it up and I went for an old school film, The Night of the Hunter.

I had never seen this film before but it has appeared on top 50 horror lists and is meant to be a classic so I thought I would chance it. I have to say I did really enjoy this film but I'm not sure that I would classify it as a horror film.

The film looks glorious and some shots in particular are spectacular. I loved the shots of the bedroom before the murder and the wide shot of the fruit cellar when Harry Powell goes down. Half the screen is blacked out and its like the director has pulled the camera back to show the set, but it really works well. On reading up on the film afterwards I learned that the director Charles Laughton was a theatre director initially, which in hindsight these shots reminded me of. Fin also remarked at the time that it reminded him of some of the German expressionist films of the 1920's such as The Cabinet of Dr Caligari.

The journey down the river also contains numerous images of animals and I think these often symbolise the children's vulnerability. These, the sets (as previously mentioned), the lighting (which was incredible - especially when Harry Powell first turns up at the Harpers house and when he was sitting outside Mrs Coopers house) and a number of the camera angles (including an ambitious crane shot at the beginning and the simply breathtaking underwater shot) still stand up today and were outwith the norm at the time for a Hollywood picture. This may account for the poor critical reception of this film upon its release.

Some people have stated that this was the reason that Charles Laughton never directed again after this film, whilst others state that it was because Laughton preferred directing in the theatre as you could change things night from night and update it and improve as you went along, whereas with film you could not change anything once you had put it out there. Whatever the reason its a real shame that he never directed again (as for how this film was panned upon its release I'm not sure how this could be the case!).

The performances are universally excellent, with Robert Mitchum oozing charisma and menace in every scene. No more so than the scene where the children were trying to escape in the boat - I was literally shouting at the TV telling them to hurry up! The child actors are also excellent as is Lillian Gish as Mrs Cooper.

Whilst I wouldn't say that this is an out and out horror film, it does contain an incredibly unnerving and unsettling "bad guy". It's an incredible film to look at with some exceptional performances and I was gripped for the entire 90 minutes. I would recommend this film to everyone.

Ally's Review: The Night of the Hunter

I was excited to see Clarky come with The Night of the Hunter this week. I had been meaning to bring this film to the table since the first season of Horror Club, but somehow it had been forgotten. I first saw it when I was a kid and I found it pretty terrifying. My Dad suggested that we watch it and I wasn’t up for it at all – I wasn’t exactly enamoured with those dusty old black and white movies. I was proven wrong and I’ve had a high opinion of this film ever since.

Firstly, I have to agree with Clarky, I’d question whether this can really be classified as a Horror movie. However, it doesn’t really matter either way – this is an even better film than I’d previously realised. I can’t find any significant flaw and it deserves to be included amongst the very best films ever made (regardless of genre).

Robert Mitchum creates one of the most sinister, magnetically charming, and endlessly watchable villains to ever grace the silver screen. When you hear him sing ‘Leaning on the everlasting arms’ there is a quality to it that is captivating: you understand his seductive powers. It’s up there with the greatest performances I’ve seen. There are plenty of other superb performances too. Lillian Gish is superb as Mrs Cooper, the antithesis of Harry Powell, who guards her flock against his evil pursuit. The performances by the children are also fantastic, the film wouldn’t work without them being believable.

Special mention has be given to the lighting in this film. In my youth, I foolishly used to think that there were no redeeming features of black & white films. However, I think that it’s actually a real strength of the movie. The way the film is lit is quite astonishing: it’s years ahead of its time. I don’t think a movie in full Technicolor glory could come close to achieving the effect. Watch the clip that Fin has included in his review, it’s quite remarkable. Perhaps it was too forward thinking for its time, hence the critical and box office mauling.

An absolutely superb film and a real change of pace after the double helping of Argento. Anyone, regardless of their interest in horror, should watch this classic.