The GullCottage  / sandlot
                            Online Film Magazine / Library / Network 

                        Celebrating the Art of Cinema, ... and Cinema as Art


Your Subtitle text

Articles Archive
  October 2014
(revised 10/11/15)
(revised 9/13/18)

* (April / May 2012) 20/20 FUTURE VISION: THE 20 BEST SCI FI FILMS OF THE PAST 20 YRS.
* (Dec. 2011 / rev. Nov. 2016)  THE 12 (24 ALTERNATE) DAYS OF CHRISTMAS - PT. 1


OUR "4 Fs":
(Whew! That's a mouthful)



 by CEJ 

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS' "Halloween for grown ups" moment   

     HAPPY HALLOWEEN EVERYONE!  Remember in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, when Melinda Dillon and Richard Dreyfuss are waiting on the road at night, with a crowd of others for what they believe will be the re-arrival of a UFO they saw the previous night? And she, chuckling to herself at her own (perhaps) silliness, says to him, "It's like Halloween for grown ups."?  Back in 1977 that was charmingly ironic and humorous.  But today (like it or not) it kind of just IS the case.  Halloween now seems to be primarily for grown ups.  Notice how you see fewer and fewer children trick-or-treating every year, but more and more adult Halloween parties?  From the Playboy mansion, to the bar across the street, to the office bash, Halloween has been commandeered by the big folks.  Seth Meyers even made humorous comment on it the other night on The Late Show, citing recent retail figures indicating that adult Halloween costumes now bring in three times more revenue per season than children's; a great irony as they're made of far less material.  Badaboom!  

     And this is okay.  I mean, because (no disrespect to our "mini me"s out there; you're all adorable in your bunny suits and AVENGERS outfits), but Mom and Dad probably need the cathartic release of pretending to be someone else, and scaring the beejesus out of someone, and being scared in return, maybe just a little more than the young'uns, especially these days.  And while not everyone can afford to do the big budget Heidi Klum (or even Martha Stewart) Halloween outfit and party, just about EVERYone enjoys settling in for an evening or two of good scare'em fright flicks.  Let's admit that EVERYone loves a good horror film.  Hey, even those who say they hate horror movies really enjoy two or three.  They've maybe seen them a few times on video or on cable.  They know what's coming, but they still cower, cover their eyes and grab the person next to them on the couch. Then later they (not unlike Melinda Dillon in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS) chuckle to themselves at their own silliness for doing so.  Once again, this is A-Okay.  Life just can't be taken TOO seriously all the time.  It just isn't healthy. 

              Super model Heidi Klum goes the max at her annual Vegas Halloween Party

     That's why we dream after all, isn't it, to keep from going crazy in the day by ventilating all those pent up fears and frustrations at night?  And the horror film genre allows us to do that arguably better and more effectively than any other.  Needless to say every year every publication and show (online or broadcast) rolls out their list of "All Time Best Horror Films".  And, I dunno, I always think they're kind of boringly the same, don't you?  They all have THE EXORCIST, HALLOWEEN, THE SHINING, THE OMEN, ALIEN, yadda yadda yadda.  And those are fantastic films.  But rather than doing the "Best" thing we always thought doing a "Favorites" list was more interesting ... and fun.  For with a "Faves" list you also get to include all those "Guilty Pleasures" no self-respecting film fan should ever admit to liking in a thousand years.  I bet you've NEVER seen a Halloween movie list which includes THE DEVIL'S RAIN.  Well, we've got no shame in our game.  We've got that one covered.  Anyway, ...  

     This Halloween season time last year we rolled out, on the GullCottage / Sandlot’s  Facebook page, a nifty month long countdown list (adding two to three entries per day) of what we called our “4 Fs” - FIFTY FAVORITE FRIGHT FLICKS OF ALL TIME: LEADING UP TO PERHAPS THE GREATEST HORROR FILM EVER MADE … WHICH YOU’VE PROBABLY NEVER EVER HEARD OF.  And yeah, that’s a mouthful of a title.  But it grabs one’s attention, does it not?  And, let me reiterate - with the exception of the “PERHAPS THE GREATEST HORROR FILM EVER MADE … WHICH YOU’VE PROBABLY NEVER EVER HEARD OF” part, we’re not necessarily saying these are the 50 BEST horror films ever, just our personal faves.  It's important to be clear on that. 

   Fear and fun hand in hand: the Two Stephens (Colbert & King)

      What causes something to be a “best” or “favorite” will vary from person to person.  And Stephen King once made wonderful analogy to this by describing each person’s mind as a mesh or screen or net.  And how the interlaced spaces within everyone’s mesh differs from those of the next person.  Therefore items which may pass through the mesh of one will tend to get “caught up” within the mesh of another.  And that kinda nicely sums up succinctly, wittily and visually how and why everyone has a different favorite color or song or movie, or why one loves blondes while another fella's into brunettes or redheads. 

PRINCE OF DARKNESS motion picture score:
"Hell Breaks Loose" - J. Carpenter / A. Howarth

     As for our own mesh, what makes a horror film a fave of ours is that very elusive factor where, while a film will make you jump-and-creep-you-out-and-make-you-cover-your-eyes-and-give-you-nightmares-and-the-heeby-jeebys-after-you-get-home-from-the-movies-and-you-step-into-that-empty-dark-house-or-long-apartment-hallway ... ALL ALONE!!! (cue the Crypt Keeper laugh ... "Hee! hee! hee!"), they’re also kind of a good time too.  Excuse me?  Well yeah, there should be an element of fun.  Not necessarily camp, mind you.  We can't stand that crap.  A little is nice when (like salt or cologne) used sparingly.  But more times than not in recent days it seems to be the defacto fall-back-upon position or filmic tone taken when a movie maker can’t figure out how to carry something off in a convincingly straight manner. 

Camp rules (and ruins) the day in FREDDY VS. JASON (2003)

     They begin second guessing themselves and the audience, and thinking perhaps the originally intended final result will perhaps look a little too silly.  So it becomes “Let’s just yuck it up big time, filling the dialog with all manner of ’clever’ verbal entendres so the audience won't make the mistake of thinking we’re not intelligent, self aware / post modern (oh brother, THAT phrase!) filmists, but that we're genuinely sophisticated enough to not take this shit seriously”.  In other words said creator(s) become more concerned about their own rep (covering one’s own “artistic” ass) than the audience.  And that's always the death knell of any film, genre one or otherwise, as it emits an almost subconscious disdain for the material.  Like a young inexperienced bumpkin hot to trot at the High School dance, and who slapped on just a little too much Axe because in the TV commercials it drove the babes wild, so can an audience smell that cinematic attitude miles away, even if they may not necessarily be able to pinpoint exactly from whence said olfactory funk cometh.  

     Now, it's going to at first look like we're indiscriminately jumping all over the map thematically here, but I promise you within a couple of paragraphs it'll all string together nicely like the written equivalent of an elegant pearl necklace.  So, diving in (so to speak) - I vividly remember seeing JAWS in the theater five times during the summer it opened in 1975.  Like many of you, Spielberg films always held a personal fascination for me in childhood.  And in some respects that particular director’s ongoing career has served as a series of recurring “sign posts” in my life the same way others will fondly remember a World Series, NBA or Stanley Cup championship 20 or 30 years ago.  That neat thing we do subconsciously - flashing back to who we were at that time, and to what future hopes and dreams we had.  Then maybe flashing forward to how it all eventually turned out - our subconscious necessarily “hitching a ride” on those cinematic or sports event "time machines" back to better days. 

     In that respect seeing Spielberg’s DUEL on television for the first time fired my imagination as no other TV movie ever had, helping to influence me into wanting to write “that kind of stuff“ when I got older.  And Spielberg’s 1974 theatrical directorial debut, THE SUGARLAND EXPRESS, would be the very first movie I’d memorize - every line of dialog, note of John Williams’ score; every edit, camera pan, sound effect and fade.  There are many such memorized films bangin' about like bumper cars in my noggin now, but SUGARLAND was the first. 

    JAWS (1975)

     In the late 1970s / early 80s HBO bursts onto the cable scene and changed it forever.  It would change this kid forever too as back then "Hibbo" (as me and my classmates called it) was not only a movie network but ESPN, Sundance Channel, IFC, Turner Classic Movies, NPR and even the Playboy Network (after certain hours - “ehh hem!”) all wrapped into one.  And I was one of those who just devoured EVERYthing - watching the same film two (sometimes three) times per day over a given month. 

     And yes, reciting an entire film while Mom was cooking dinner or Dad was driving the family down to the shore, I'm certain drove them a little batty at times.  But the up side (and somehow they realized this and encouraged it - go figure) was that after seeing a film 35 times within a month, ... .  Well, you're imperceptibly going to start thinking with the mindset and mental lens of a screenwriter, director, editor or cinematographer.  Anyway, not meaning to digress, ...

     JAWS was another Spielberg “sign post” - the first film I saw multiple times in the theater - FIVE DIFFERENT theaters in fact across the U.S.  I’d first see it alone on a local screen in Willingboro, N.J., then another time with friends, then across the river in Philadelphia with family, then (as my father was an interstate trucker, and I often traveled with him during the summer months) in Dallas, Texas, then in another movie house somewhere in southern Florida.  And the awesome part was how EVERY audience (regardless of geography, age, sex, race, whatever) RESPONDED IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.  Everyone laughed and screamed and jumped and dropped their popcorn boxes and sodas in and at exactly the same scenes … almost to the very same nanosecond to which the audience did in that theater three weeks ago and a thousand miles away.  That “seeing JAWS in five theaters" summer was not only a creative eye opener, but an early lesson into mass audience psychology.  Perhaps the greatest (certainly earliest) example ever of the power of film to reach into and come out with the heart, soul and guts (hell, we’re talking about horror films, right? … so yeah, GUTS!) of an audience through the craftsman-like manipulation of the cinematic medium.  In a word “Wow“!  

                                                                                                                                                        THE EXORCIST (1973)

     Spielberg years later would recount how, after previewing JAWS to an early audience - how with the scene where the corpse head of Ben Gardner pops out from the hull of his boat, and Richard Dreyfuss drops the flashlight and does that classic underwater freakout, how he then decided to, via editing, make Dreyfuss’ freakout a tad longer, as well as his swim back to the surface, because the audience was screaming and yelling and then laughing (at themselves) so much, the din of it all drowned out the dialog of the next scene where Roy Schieder and Dreyfuss try to convince the Mayor (Murray Hamilton) to close the beaches.  This audience “screaming then laughing (at themselves)” thing is to us such an integral part of a great horror film. 

     It happens (differently but definitely) too in films such as THE EXORCIST, THE OMEN and THE SHINING.  While certainly not funny movies, while exiting the theaters and heading home from them there was a lot of audience chuckling going on, with patrons laughing about how their date or brother or sister, or (grinning and good-naturedly embarrassed like Melinda Dillon in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS) they themselves reacted. You‘d swear they‘d just come off an amusement park rollercoaster.  And in a way they had.

   The "Crate Monster" from CREEPSHOW (1982)

     Volumes of cinema history theory textbooks inform us there’s a deep psychological catharsis which happens when we’re allowed to safely “dip into” the darker side of the human psyche then re-emerge 90 minutes or so later safe and sound in our theater seats.  But there’s also a “fun-ness” into and out of that Space Mountain ride into Joseph Conrad / Friedrich Nietzsche land.  Or at least there SHOULD be.  In the end there should be some kind of glee in knowing you survived unscathed.  And how, even though while you were in the midst of the terror back then, and you swore and prayed, “Just let me get through this and I’ll never do it again”, ... you now can’t wait to do it again, you promise breakin' son-of-a-bitch.  That’s the fun part.  And (not trying to come off as an old fart), far too many current horror films seem to go to one or the other far side of the spectrum: becoming little more than a "camp-it-up" fest with gore, or a fun-less exercise in filmmaker self aggrandizement.  To us the later began (we may catch brick bats for this) with 1999’s THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT. 

     BLAIR WITCH was the fulcrum shift point for the new millennium horror film in that it (to us at least) ultimately felt more like a brilliant ad campaign (and it's pre-release online P.R. juggernaut was ingenious) in search of an actual film worthy of those efforts.  Upon leaving the theater there was an almost palpable sense of having been duped / ripped off in an almost boiler room-like marketing hustle.  From a craft standpoint BLAIR WITCH is masterful filmmaking.  It's got damned good characterizations and performances.  And what co-writer / co-directors Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez accomplished on a miniscule budget was perhaps the greatest act of cinematic prestidigitation since Tobe Hooper’s original THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE.  But there was NO story, no narrative.  And it left the audience with a dark foggy pall upon exiting the theater.  Not that the film should have been “funny”, but it wasn’t “fun”.  And there’s a difference.  Somehow when you come out of THE EXORCIST or POLTERGEIST, or even the low budget PRISON, you emerge shaken and stirred but with that little grin - having survived the coaster.  With BLAIR WITCH one feels more like the forced victim of the stereotypical (sorry Eduardo) “Dirty Sanchez”.  Some of you may have to Google that one. 

                                                                                                                                   THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT (1999)

     While Myrick and Sanchez’s careers in film didn’t skyrocket in the wake of BLAIR WITCH (each did a few web series and relatively unknown genre films), every studio exec did put out the edict to (as Peter Guber says) “Get me one of those!” - something cheap and filmed quickly by a near novice filmmaker, which could turn a huge profit within one weekend.  The era of the humorless “found footage” horror film had begun. 

   Some will say, "Yeah, but back in the 1960s / 70s, B-movie king Roger Corman built a studio empire via that brand of filmmaking - with the near-novice movie makers at the time being Bogdanovich Coppolla, Scorcese, Ron Howard and that entire cinematic posse".  The difference however was that the Corman films, while at times transgressive (ever see Coppolla’s DEMENTIA 13?), still had an air of “ghoulish fun” - or they at least (and this is important, and where talent and craft come in) contained elements subtly and artfully embedded within them which encouraged the audience themselves to subconsciously bring fun (and emotional release) into the equation.  In the same way say a chef may sprinkle a barely noticeable dash of pepper on their Crème brûlée in order to get the diner's taste buds to salivate a bit more, become more sensitive, then by extension make the brûlée taste sweeter without having to add any extra sugar, so did Scorcese, Coppolla, et al do the same thing cinematically. 

     The well wrought horror film is a much more complex, intelligent and psychologically probing exercise than most think.  It ain't just blood and guts and nifty gravity defying CGI images which look good during a 30 second TV spot.  THE LAST EXORCISM, THE AWAKENING, THE POSSESSION, THE CONJURING, OCULUS - some of them are damned well made films.  But don't you think there's a terrible sameness to them all - both visually and thematically?  Can anyone really cite (let alone remember) their various story lines and characters as much as their nift-i-ly realized visual tricks?  And as for the "found footage" horror trend, can anyone really cite the differences, story wise / character-wise between the five PARANORMAL ACTIVITY films between 2009 - 2014?  And there's another one coming up next year.  Just a little filmic food for thought.

               DEMENTIA 13 (1963)

     Corman and Scorcese and the others didn't TELL the audience they should be having fun (as in the campy horror films), but they instead encouraged them to WANT to bring fun into the theater in order to emotionally save themselves from the ride.  Those fortunate (some would say "unfortunate") enough to have experienced watching a horror film in an old school midtown grindhouse theater during the 1970s - 90s know exactly what we're talking about.  Everyone was there to have the pants scared off of them.  But when it got a little too intense, people would start talking back to, yelling at, and hurling jokes and sundry MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 3000-like commentary, at the characters (good and evil) on the screen.  There was even laughter as reaction to these comments. 

     It's that JAWS "mass-psychology-audience-manipulation-through-cinematic-craft" thing going on.   How else can one explain the sub par sequel CHILD'S PLAY 2 (1990) being one of the most enjoyable nights out at the movies we've ever experienced?  While certainly a step down from Tom Holland's original, it still focuses on characters.  Foster children Andy (from the first film) and teenage Kyle (who begins as cynical and self absorbed, but eventually ends up as Andy's protector) are genuinely touching.  So much so that the most hard core audience of inner city grindhouse theater patrons fell in love with them.  This of course made what happened to them that much more terrifying, engrossing, and their ultimate survival / victory a wonderful rollercoaster / cathartic release mechanism for the audience.  It's not a great film by any means.  But it's a REALLY ENJOYABLE one. 

     You see the same thing at work in director Wes Craven's otherwise forgettable THE PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS (1991).  It's soooo all about craft, and about loving the audience.  That is what is necessarily part and parcel of the elusive mixture of fear, fun and craft which makes a horror film not only a fun night at the movies when first viewed, but years later a favored gem. 
Whew!  See, told you it would all string together by the end.  At any rate, all of this to say …

   The sub par but very enjoyable CHILD'S PLAY 2 (1990)

     As stated this is a list of our “4 Fs” - FIFTY FAVORITE FRIGHT FLICKS of all time.  And once again, perhaps with the exception of that “GREATEST WHICH YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF” pick at the end, we’re not calling the other 49 the absolute BEST.  That's for you to decide with your own list.  We’re just calling them our faves based on the criteria of our own (admittedly subjective) "fun" meter.  And yeah, we know, some may be miffed at the exclusion on our list of an obvious choice or two such as our own beloved JAWS or even John Carpenter’s legendary HALLOWEEN, especially since we’ve included a few other Carpenter titles. 

     But like we said, it’s all so subjective.  In the case of JAWS for example, while it IS a horror film (the first half anyway), it’s usually not thought of as such by most, not even by it’s creators.  And since we originally had a much longer list which we had to trim down to 50, we decided to leave it off.  As for HALLOWEEN, we’ll be honest and say maybe because it was such an obvious choice, we just plain simply forgot to include it.  Sorry about that Michael Myers fans.  We’ll do better next time, we swear.  But as said, we’re not trying to cure cancer here; just having a good time, and we hope you will too while scrolling through this nifty listing of film trivia, music and clips.

 Lon Chaney in LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT (1927 - left) and PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (1925 - right)


     Oh yeah, also keep in mind that, w
ith the exception of that #1 choice again, the films aren’t listed in any kind of ascending or “worst to best” order.  We love 'em all equally: the super cheesy-fied (but cool and creepy) SSSSSS! every bit as much as Robert Wise’s original THE HAUNTING.  From the art house SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE to the 1931 Spanish language version of DRACULA, then on to Ridley Scott’s still trend-setting ALIEN, a good time is a good time is a good time no matter how you  (heh! heh!), "chop it up" (once again mentally insert the Crypt Keeper laugh, "Hee! Hee! Hee!") Nighty nite! 

CEJ (10/22/14)                                                    


Excerpt: TERROR IN THE AISLES (1984) -
Opening Montage Sequence
Hosts: Donald Pleasence / Nancy Allen


Site Search Index:

THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979) motion picture score: "Get Out" / "The Wind" - L. Schifrin

#50 - THE HAUNTING (1963)

      Best known for musicals (THE SOUND OF MUSIC, WEST SIDE STORY) and sci fiers (THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE), director Robert Wise here created one of the scariest films in cinema history by showing the audience ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Via masterful sound design, cinematography and distorted imaging, his adaptation of Shirley Jackson's legendary novel (THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE) would become THE paradigm thriller from which later books & films such as THE EXORCIST, THE SHINING and POLTERGEIST would liberally borrow.



#49 - PUMPKINHEAD (1988)

      1998's PUMPKINHEAD was in some respects a "hillbilly horror" variation on the Greek tragedy of Electra. When the child of peaceful rural widower Ed Harley (Lance Henriksen) is accidentally killed in an accident involving a vacationing group of young "city folk", the grieving father calls upon an ancient demon from a cursed pumpkin patch to exact horrific vengeance upon those responsible. The only twist which he didn't count upon, is he must experience every murderous moment through the eyes and ears of the creature as his mind and soul is the fuel which powers it. The directorial debut of late great FX maestro / creature designer Stan Winston (THE TERMINATOR, JURASSIC PARK, PREDATOR), PUMPKINHEAD's theatrical debut was delayed as it's original studio (De Laurentiis Entertainment Group) went bankrupt. It was later distributed by United Artists, and has since developed a rabid cult following.


#48 - THE OMEN (1976)

      In Europe, when the newborn son of an American diplomat (Gregory Peck) dies at birth, the father (unbeknownst to his wife) adopts another infant to call their own. Years later, a series of macabre and deadly "accidents" involving those who know the child's true parentage, force the couple to a realization that they may indeed be raising the actual Anti-Christ as foretold in the Bible. Remaining true to his dictum of "Verisimilitude" (making the impossible seem more real by presenting it in as true to life a manner as possible), dir. Richard Donner (SUPERMAN, LETHAL WEAPON) jettisoned the more symbolic elements of David Seltzer's original THE OMEN script (cloven holves, etc.) and designed every "accident" to seem as if they could have both natural or supernatural causes.




     Produced by Francis Ford Coppola, and with a screenplay co-written by Frank Darabont (THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, THE WALKING DEAD), Kenneth Branagh's mounting of Shelley's 1818 novel, while taking a few narrative liberties, still remains the most faithful film version to date. Critics were divided on dir. Branagh's operatic approach to the material - some calling it over the top, while others felt it gloriously theatrical. We fall into the later camp. But whether they liked it or not, nearly all agreed it was a stunning masterpiece of production design, costumes, cinematography, makeup FX and music (Patrick Doyle's powerhouse score is insane!). And dig that cast: Branagh as the Doctor, along with Helena Bonham Carter, Ian Holm, John Cleese, Tom Hulce, Aidan Quinn, ... and Robert DeNiro as the "monster". Grand and glorious!


#46 - SSSSSSS (1973)

      A clever variation on H.G. Wells' THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU, SSSSSSS stars the always enjoyable Strother Martin (COOL HAND LUKE, BUTCH CASSIDY & THE SUNDANCE KID) and a young Dirk Benedict - who'd go on to genre fame as the original BATTLESTAR GALACTICA's Starbuck and as "Face" on TV's THE A-TEAM.  Martin is a (mad) rural scientist who believes the only hope for human survival in a future of pollution is for the species to adapt reptilian traits. He therefore sets about using his young assistant (Benedict) as a test subject. Don't write this nifty little film off because of it's silly-assssssed title. Produced by the team of Richard Zanuck & David Brown (JAWS, THE STING) and directed by two-time Emmy winner Bernard L. Kowalski (the uncle of producer Brian Grazer by the way!), it's well written and performed, and features knock-out makeup FXs from PLANET OF THE APES' legendary John Chambers. Although there is something odd about NOT watching it in a drive-in.



#45 - DRACULA (Spanish Language Vers. / 1931)

      Realizing a large share of film profits were coming in from South American countries, in the late 1920s / early 30s Universal Studios founder Carl Laemmle commissioned a number of Spanish language versions of features then in production. Filmed at night on the same sets as their English language counterparts, they featured Hispanic performers and a different crew of film makers. Most of them forgotten over the years, the most acclaimed was and still IS the Spanish language version of DRACULA - shot concurrently with the Bela Lugosi classic, but with George Melford taking over director Tod Browning's role, and actors Carlos Villarias & Lopita Tovar taking over the Lugosi and Helen Chandler characters. While most concur that Villarias, while good, is no match for Lugosi, most also agree the Spanish version (slightly longer, more atmospheric, and with a much more mobile camera) is a better film in and of itself. Long believed lost, a print was rediscovered and re-released in the 1970s

#44 - WARLOCK (1989 / 1991)

      At a time when studios were lavishing massive dollars on extravaganzas like Tim Burton's first BATMAN, THE ABYSS, and sequels to LETHAL WEAPON, BACK TO THE FUTURE and GHOSTBUSTERS, the clever lower budgeted WARLOCK (written by future THE FUGITIVE, WATERWORLD, RIDDICK scribe David Twohy; directed by FOREVER YOUNG's Steve Miner, and featuring one of maestro Jerry Goldsmith's most original scores) kinda / sorta came and went unnoticed, only to be re-discovered on video years later. "Kinda / sorta" because completed in 1989, it didn't see theatrical release (and a limited one at that) till '91 as it's original producer, New World Pictures, went belly up, and it was ultimately acquired by Trimark. A nifty reworking of Gilgemesh (from which THE TERMINATOR and TIME AFTER TIME also borrow) the film follows two adversaries from the 17th century - a powerful warlock (Julian Sands) and a witch hunter on his trail (Richard E. Grant), as they tumble through time into modern day America in search of an unholy book which can "un-create" the universe.  For an "unknown" film WARLOCK became the biggest hit of small scale distributor Trimark until EVE'S BAYOU nearly 10 years later.  It also gained enough of a financially viable cult following to warrant the 1993 sequel WARLOCK: THE ARMAGEDDON as well as a direct to video three-quel, along with a series of video games and comic books. 




#43 - WILLARD (1971)

      In the wake of a series of "youth oriented" films of the late 1960s / early 70s (EASY RIDER, GOODBYE COLUMBUS, etc.), many "old school-er" movie makers were driven to the realm of genre material, bringing to it a class, intelligence and quality hitherto unknown. Case in point - 1971's WILLARD - directed by Daniel Mann (THE TEAHOUSE OF THE AUGUST MOON, BUTTERFIELD 8), co-starring Ernest Borgnine and Elsa Lanchester in one of her final roles, and with a score by the legendary Alex North (SPARTACUS). 

     This fairly close adaptation of Irish novelist Stephen Gilbert's cleverly structured "RATMAN'S NOTEBOOKS" starred young Bruce Davison (known to later generations as Senator Kelly in the X-MEN films) as social misfit Willard Stiles, who befriends two rats, Socrates & Ben, and in turn comes to be protected by and leader of them and an army of hundreds of their kind. Remade (rather well) with Crispin Glover in 2003, the original still ranks as one of the creepiest (and coolest) thrillers ever made, especially to those city dwellers with an unbridled fear of large rodents.  Followed one year later by the equally popular (if less critically lauded) sequel BEN.  "Tear 'em up!



#42 - PRISON (1988)

      Director Renny Harlin went on to bigger budgeted epics (DIE HARD 2, CLIFFHANGER, DEEP BLUE SEA). But none of them were as stylistically impressive as 1988's PRISON - his first American feature. Don't be put off by the low rent trailer. Starring a pre-LORD OF THE RINGS Viggo Mortensen and character actor fave Lane Smith (LOIS & CLARK: THE NEW ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN; RICHARD NIXON: THE FINAL DAYS), PRISON cleverly mines standard thematic territory in a brisk telling of wrongly accused inmate Charles Forsythe, who "rode the chair" years ago, and who comes back to wreck vengeance upon the correctional officers who knew of his innocence.  His primary weapon? - the principal cause of his death of course, electricity.  A powerhouse of an ending too!  "Charlie's gonna git 'cha!"


#41 - THE EXORCIST (1973)

      Of course we'd get to this one - one of our all time favorite films PERIOD!. Many today don't get the disturbing power of THE EXORCIST as they're paying attention to FX and cinematic "scare 'em" techniques - both of which this film's contributions still qualifies as tops. But it's greatest impact is psychological. William Peter Blatty's best seller becomes the biggest cinematic Rorschach test since Kubrick's 2001 when the paths of three parties - a single mother, elderly Priest, and young former inner city boxer turned holy man (each experiencing a crisis of guilt and self worth) are thrown together when the mother's child is possessed by a demonic spirit who knows the psychological weaknesses of the three parties, and it appears the possession of the child was merely a ploy in getting them all together under one roof with a diabolical purpose. Powerful and mind boggling!



      After years of sequels, remakes and sequels to remakes, Tobe Hooper's 1974 original still packs the biggest whallop. While the story is commonplace (a group of young city folk encounter a family of serial killers in the woods), it's filmic execution is what still stuns today. Rolling elements of real life serial predators Elmer Wayne Henley and Ed Gein into the narrative, then realizing the story via revolutionary film editing and sound design, Hooper turns this daytime descent into darkest hell (and it's really not that explicit a film, not by today's standards) into more a subconscious fever dream than a straight up horror film. In fact it was it's pronounced LACK of explicit bloodletting (unlike say Wes Craven's LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT) which turned this shoestring-budgeted little masterpiece into a mainstream hit.


Pg. 1, 2, 3, 4,


Website Builder