Monthly Archives: July 2011

When remakes go unnoticed.

Posted on by
Reply

We all know about remakes. They take movies we love, make a re-telling, or a modern day version, etc. If there’s anything that can make a horror fan upset, it’s a bad remake, hell, sometimes it’s just hearing that there will be a remake. But what about when you didn’t know a film was remade and it slips through the cracks? What about when you didn’t even realize the movie you watched was a remake? Do we judge them differently the less we hear about them?

I’ve picked out four remakes that didn’t get the attention most remakes get, and I want to know, does the lack of conversation about them change the way you feel?

 Piranha.

Right now everyone is saying ” hold on a second, we all seen the Piranha remake”, and while this is true, I have to ask, did you know that Piranha 3D was the second time it was remade? This remake produced by Roger Corman in 1995 is nearly identical to the original, they just took out the humor. In fact, it is so identical, instead of shooting new special effects, they rehashed the old ones.

It’s Alive.

Not many people I know have seen Larry Cohen’s 1974 killer baby film, It’s Alive. Even less people I know have heard about the 2008 remake. The story is pretty much the same, killer baby, committing murders, etc. The only real big change is the fact the mother defends the baby in the end, instead of the father. When asked about it Larry Cohen told fans of the original, ” anyone who likes my film should cross the street and avoid seeing the new”.


Thirteen Ghosts

Thirteen Ghosts is a remake of the 1960 film, 13 Ghosts directed by  William Castle. Coming out two years after another of Castle’s film remakes ( House On Haunted Hill), this one quite a bit better. The story goes in different directions, but you’d be hard pressed to see any of Castle’s films remade with the same story. A lot bloodier and just as much fun as the original,  it seems to go under the remake radar.

Day Of The Dead

Normally when we think Day Of The Dead, we think Romero, we think shambling undead, and political undertones. This time we have fast zombies, and action heroes. There’s none of the undertones that made Romero a legend, and there’s none of the great special effects and tension that made the Dawn Of The Dead remake in 2004 so enjoyable.

Night Of The Demons (2009)

Posted on by
Reply


Night of the demons is a remake. Everyone should know that, but I think it’s always good to get that out in the open first. Some people will have stopped reading after that sentence, while others will read on with their minds already made. Remakes get a lot of hate in the horror community, and understandable so. I mean if you take and make a new version of a character I love, I’m going to hold the new one to higher standards.  That said, I think I’m a bigger fan of this remake, then the original.

The story is simple, huge party being thrown at a house that people went missing in years and years ago, for the Halloween season. The party is busted by the cops, but a handful of guests get stuck in the house. One by one they are killed or possessed by demons. We’ve heard  it all before, so what makes this one better then others?

Sex, blood, and more sex. The demons in this one spread through sexual acts, such as kissing, and demon anal. They also spread through death, rip some one’s face and tits off? Don’t worry, they’ll be back up in a few minutes. There is a lot of sexual fun in this one, that works every time I view it, where Trailer Park Of Terror it feels forced and just gets annoying on further viewings.

The special effects are quite well done. There’s some shaky camera work, so some of the special effects and action is a little hard to follow, and I’ve never been a fan of that, but it isn’t too bad in this one. The writing is quite good, which is a surprise, since it shares writer/director of Autopsy, which was quite weak in the writing department. Adam Gierasch has been writing horror movies since 2000, most are hit and miss, miss in my opinion, but this one comes across as well written, and fun.

A lot has changed from the original, but it makes sense when you think of how 80s those movies are. This one feels like a modern re-telling, and works well as one. I connect easier to this one then the older, but that’s in no way something to hold against the original. Watch them both!

Score – 80%
Gore – 8/10

Monster Monday: The Creeper

Posted on by
Reply

Talking about the Creeper is almost like the set up to a bad joke. What’s ugly, inspired by the predator, and wants nothing more then to eat your body and gain your limbs? The Creeper of course.

  No one can say for sure how long the Creeper has been around, but we were lucky enough to meet him for the first time in 2001, and again in 2003. While being in two movies, they both take place in the same 23 days.

The Creeper  is a beast that has roamed North Florida for 23 days every 23 years when it awakens. With the ability to sense fear, it will track anyone that it smells, has something it wants. It will hunt you down, and it will tear whatever piece of you it wants off, and have a little snack.

  The reason it eats, isn’t because it’s hungry, it’s to regenerate it’s own body. So if it eats your eyes, it’s eyes will regenerate. This makes the bugger hard to kill. Sorry, I should say impossible. You can hit this bad boy with a spear, stab it as many times as you want, or run it over again and again. It’ll get up. At least until it’s 23 days are done.


The Creeper has a unique style of hunting. Provoking fear in it’s targets, as well as unleashing a headfirst, never let up attack, not only does it provoke fear, but a feeling of hopelessness, as if there’s nothing that will stand between it and you.

 Even though it has wings and can fly at great speeds, when it’s trying not to get noticed it will use a truck. It use to store bodies in the truck it would take back to it’s lair, and decorate the walls with them. When it’s lair was in danger of being found by the cops, it burned it to the ground though.

As if being able to kill you with it’s wings, and bare hands weren’t enough. As if eating you to regenerate just wasn’t good enough, The Creeper is also an expert  at forging makeshift weapons, like it’s Ax, or it’s Bone Throwing Stars.


When the only thing that can stop it, is running out of time, it makes me glad to say we don’t got to worry about it waking up until 2024, or when it jumps back on screen in Jeepers Creepers 3: Cathedral.

Wind Chill (2007)

Posted on by
1


I had seen trailers for Wind Chill pop up quite a bit since I started doing this, and it looked good. It looked like a good ghost story with the twist that the person she was with was her stalker. But this movie made a few mistakes in it’s marketing, and lost impact because of it.

We follow around Emily Blunt who plays ‘girl’, as she ride shares with the creepy ‘ guy’ who seems to know just a little too much about her. I like this aspect of the story quite a bit. The guy is creepy, always just saying a little too much about her, just little slips as if he knows her, even though they are strangers. This is the first forty or so minutes, and the strongest part of the movie.

Then we go into the ghost story part. They crash the car, and we start to get frights from ghosts, and there’s even a cop ghost that comes when a certain song plays on the radio. This lasts til the end of the movie, and I think it is where the movie just takes a dive for the worse. The cop ghost as a villain isn’t scary, and the whole ghost story side is quite predictable.

The trailer make the ‘guy’ seem like much more of a threat in the movie. But they end up starting to have feelings for each other, even having him raise to the occasion as a ghost to save her in the end. Trust me, it’s only spoilers if you didn’t see it coming ten miles before hand.

This one has weak special effects, the characters aren’t very likable, and the story is pretty predictable. I wish I could recommend it, since I wanted to like it, but it just didn’t pull it together.

Score – 60%
Gore – 1/10

Left On The Cutting Room Floor : Seed Of Chucky

Posted on by
Reply

Last time I took a look at The Hills Have Eyes, and talked about how the Uncut version had much more of an impact over the R-rated. But what about when a film is just given a few added scenes to sell an unrated version? Scenes that wouldn’t of put the movie too far.

Well that’s easy to answer. You get Seed Of Chucky.

About an hour in, we get our first change. The rated version version of the scene is 5.97 seconds. While the unrated’s is 6.01. So what’s that bad that could change in a scene in 6 seconds?

Let’s look at the rated’s one first.

It’s just Chucky looking down for 6 seconds. While masturbating. I’m sorry, but I think you and me both now that this is just going to go down hill from here.

That’s right. They decided in the unrated version we should see Chucky Rubbing his Rubber. Who thought this was a good idea? Now thankfully, they keep his hand in the way.

The ending from the original, where Glenn is at the birthday party, and Chucks arm’s in the package, had to be cut because of the new ending.

Jennifer Tilly kills her maid when she tries to quit. This is still in the rated version too remember.
Now in the rated version, her eyes change color here to show that it’s Tiffany inside really. In the Unrated we get treated to her hiding the body. That wouldn’t change it past an R.

 When it’s all done and over, she looks out the window and notices daughter watching, and we are greeted to a simple exchange.

  Wow. They really tried to get money out of us this time, and nothing more. What was a good idea to cut just for class, they put back in. And gave us a crappier ending that should of just been a special feature. Not cool.

Next time I’ll be looking at Sublime, there is quite a bit cut out of the movie. But only two scenes. How drastically can a movie change from just two scenes? You’d be surprised.