My Cthulhu, Sweet Cthulhu, I Only Have Eyes For You-Loo!! (and other literary musings)

So, as you may know, I've been continuing my Lovecraft obsession, I've read pretty much all the significant stuff (and some that isn't), so I'll retire him for now until the mood strikes me again.
"The Dunwich Horror"--the film doesn't do the story ANY justice-please someone make a new, faithful version!!
"The Call of Cthulhu"--the "mythos" surrounding this may just become my new religion! It's certainly as plausible as Christianity or any of the other major religions (more so than Scientology for sure!). Plus, tentacles!! How can you go wrong with tentacles???
Also, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention one of my favorite films from a few years ago, Ivan Zuccon's "Colour From the Dark" (loosely based on "Colour Out of Space") featuring....THE Debbie Rochon!! She was outstanding in this outstanding film, run, don't walk to buy it! By all accounts, HP was a racist, Xenophobic fuck, so he probably wouldn't like the Italian setting, but hey, he's dead! If Lovecraft were alive today, it stands to reason he'd be writing a horror blog from his Grandma's basement with his cats--check his back story, it could totally happen!!
Until I revisit his stuff, I'll say this--keep my cities cyclopean, my darkness stygian, my knowledge forbidden, and my horror eldritch, bitches!!

He ain't Lovecraft, but Rob DiLauro wrote a fuckin' book!! No shit!!

 

DiLauro, best known for his genre radio hosting skillz, has tried his hand at writing, and I must say, he's pretty damned good at it. "Scorn" book one, is now available via Amazon.com in digital and hard copy versions. I'll keep this "spoiler free", but Rob shows a skilled hand at character development, suspense, story flow, and engaging prose. "Scorn" is quite an achievement, and seemingly, a precursor to more literary scares from this Michigan native. I dug it quite a bit and can't wait to see what's next in the series--it delivers the goods man! Definitely check it out!

 

 

Until next time jerkees!! Send your bile to: tom@NerdRemix.com

 



"Evil Dead" 2013--Re-makes and the Lunatics That Debate Them

Ahhh re-makes, does anything stir up controversy, set fanboy's blood boiling, or fire up message boards across the genre quite like the news that a beloved "classic" is being re-made? Like it or not, they seem to be here to stay for the immediate future, some I enjoyed ("Last House on the Left" and "The Hills Have Eyes" are but two) and some I despised (fuck you "Friday the 13th" re-make! Fuck you right in the eyehole of your fucking cheap hockey mask!!), but lately, a lot of hate has been directed at the recent "Evil Dead" redux. Now, far be it from me to tell you what to like, but some of the reasons cited for hating on this (and a lot of other re-makes) are just plain absurd.

 

            So, please, for a moment, clear your mind of any pre conceived notions of supposed suction, and follow me!

 

 

REASONS YOU SOUND LIKE A WHINY FANBOY...

 

1. "This abomination adds too much, assumes to much too of the original's story, or it's a 'Shot-for-Shot' copy"

 

Okay, so "The Omen" was a slavish copy of the original (and also sucked), but you guys get fired up when a director expands on a story to avoid this criticism too! Example-Rob Zombie's "Halloween". "He added too much!! There's no mystery to Myers anymore!! He pissed all over Carpenter's vision!! He made Michael too human!!"--do those sound familiar? Maybe you uttered those same phrases, or maybe posted them on a board on the 'net? C'mon someone did, these things just don't happen! And when Zombie threw the whole original outline out the window for "H2"--you all cried foul again! Anyways, whether you want to own up to it or not, you're damning the film makers no matter the route they choose. "Evil Dead" featured a storyline that actually was a lot more challenging than the original's, they kept the vital parts intact, and added some nuances that worked really well in my opinion. So, in reaching a sort of "middle ground" they may have pandered to the demographic a bit, but hey, fucked if they do-fucked if they don't, right?

 

2. "'Evil Dead 2013' was FULL of plot holes!!"

 

Seriously? You just made that fucking argument with a straight face?? Have you watched the original lately?? Go ahead, pop in the DVD, check it out-I'll be here when you get back...See? The original had major plot holes as well--I ain't even going into them here. So, if you're going to bag on the re-make for that, get a grip. And if you're pissed that they didn't "fix" the plot holes? See item #1.

 

3. "Characters--I didn't care about them, too one dimensional, also, where were the iconic names??"

 

Okay let me break this down for you--"A Nightmare on Elm St."--the re-make wasn't a terrible film, no, let that sink in for a second, it really wasn't. The reason it didn't fly with genre fans? No Robert Englund!! No offense to Jackie Earle Haley (or Kelly Leake), dude, I loved him in "Watchmen", but there's no Freddy without Robert! Now, imagine for a second, Ash without Bruce Campbell...scary isn't it? Exactly! And one dimensional, "throw away" characters?? Okay, a little challenge, you know all of those 80's slasher films that clogged up the video shelves back in the day that are now regarded as "classics" even though they're mostly artless tripe?? Name some characters, other than the iconic killers themselves (or the occasional final girl)...annnnnnd...GO! Most of the time when a genre film, like "Evil Dead", takes time with character development, everybody screams "BOOOOORINGGG!! get on with the carnage already!!". So, again, it's no win situation for a writer/director.

 

4. "The plot was sooooo predictable"

 

Again, seriously?? What? Did you want everyone to live happily ever after?? This is a horror film for shit's sake!! There's an axe in corner of this house? Of course it's going to eventually be used to chop a fucker up!!! Someone goes into the cellar alone?? Of course they're going to meet a bad goddamned end!! And, on top of all of this, it's a RE-MAKE!!!! If you want all kinds of plot variations, watch a "new" film (or see item #1).

 

5. "How dare they re-make this classic anyways?"

 

This is an easy one--DON'T BUY A TICKET! Really, if you want the current trend of re-making every marginally successful horror film to end--don't support it!! Hollywood is built on money, it literally talks while bullshit walks. If nobody is buying it, they'll quit selling it--supply and demand folks! Bitching on social media probably won't do it, especially if you're bitching after you've paid 25 bucks for the blu-ray. And, while we're on the subject, the word "classic" is getting applied to a lot of turds lately. Case in point, the "Night of the Demons" re-make. Now, whatever your opinion of this "classic" (*cough-cough*, sorry, had something in my throat there...), the fanboy whining about it was priceless!! The original is not now, nor was it ever, an "art" film. Yet the passion that people complained about the re-make with was mind boggling!! I honestly think the only way the producers would have made anyone even a tiny bit happy would have been to trot out Linnea Quigley to drop her top or something!! Good thing they didn't go that far, but I don't think I'm alone in the opinion that they made a new film that was in many ways more entertaining than the original. Just goes to show, one man's "classic" is another man's cinematic stool sample!

 

            Bottom line--there's a lot to like about "Evil Dead 2013", it's violent, gory, cringe inducing in parts, and was made with a careful eye on the expectations of the fans. Embrace that shit! If they're going to keep churning out re-makes, at least we, as horror loving chuckle-heads, can support the ones that make a decent effort at re-telling a story we've all grown to love. If, after me trying desperately to make you see the light, you still want to whine, cry, and bitch about re-makes (even the quality ones), then just say "I didn't like it" or "I like the original better" rather than trying to prop up some half-assed reason or logic as to WHY it sucks!

Now, who's ready for the "Munster Go Home" re-make with Johnny Depp and Nic Cage?? Whooooooooooo-Hooooooooo!!!

 

 All complaints, death threats, bottles of free booze, and requests for sexually explicit "selfies" of other horror film reviewers (I'm looking at YOU James DePaolo!) can be sent to: tom@NerdRemix.com 

 

The Audient Void--My Current Lovecraft Obsession

 

 

 

            Lately, I've been knee deep in library books, getting equally knee deep into tales of: Arkam, The great Old Ones, weird cults, sleepy/creepy coastal New England villages, Miskatonic University, the Necronomicon, and nightmarish visions of arcane knowledge...that's right, the literary musings of HP Lovecraft.

 

            While you may or may not be a fan (admittedly, some of his early stuff is hack work), you can't deny the influence, on all things horror, that the guy Stephen King cites as his primary inspiration has had. With this in mind, I decided to revisit (and visit for the first time) some of the Lovecraft adapted horror cinema out there---I'm sure everyone has their favorites, but these are the ones I have in my crazy, hoarder-type, DVD collection...so, let's begin.

 

"Re-Animator"(1985)--Yeah, really obvious, but Stuart Gordon and Brian Yuzna managed to create a funny/repulsive little franchise that incorporates elements from Lovecraft's tale in all 3 installments--plus, let's be honest--Barbara Crampton!! Classics all of 'em!

 

"Dagon"(2001)--A creepy, frankly scary, little yarn, that, while sporting a change in venue and some character shuffling, is a pretty awesome re-creation of the fabled Innsmouth. Gordon really cooks here, serving up slimy handfuls of frog/fish goodness! Definitely check this one out--very underrated.

 

"In The Mouth of Madness"(1994)--While it doesn't exactly have Lovecraft's name attached, c'mon man! A variation/hybrid of several stories, this film contains a few genuinely unnerving set pieces. Probably the most overlooked film in John Carpenter's catalog (equally the fault of the unsatisfying, ambiguous ending and Sam Neill's criminal over acting...), this is probably one you'd want to skip, unless you're a diehard JC fan or have 90 or so minutes to waste...

 

"The Call of Cthulhu"(2005)--A black and white, silent film that is just pure genius! Andrew Leman's faithful adaptation really shines because of it's look and ambition. Superb sets on a shoestring budget, and it really captures what a film made in HP's time would have looked like. In a word--Excellent!

 

"The Dunwich Horror"(1970)--Psychedelic dream orgies, Dean Stockwell acting hella fucked up while looking like Harry Reems, 75% of Sandra Dee's left tit, and a guy that appears to be the Caucasian version of Grady from "Sanford & Son"--Daniel Haller's AIP released effort, if nothing else, keeps you watching! Sets and characters that typify the gothic cinema of the era (Hammer/AIP), this is one that's not to be missed! Campy and fun.

 

"From Beyond"(1986)--Stuart Gordon again-and he brings along a cast that's like a genre nerd's wet dream! Fire up those pineal glands, and pop this entertaining gem into your DVD deck! Adding a liberal amount to the sparse source material, this film manages to expand into a sci-fi pulp comic brought to vivid life. Ken Foree, Jeff Combs, and the amazing Ms. Crampton (who also dons a leather/latex bondage get up...just picture that for a sec...take all the time you need...) romp through this freaky, nasty, bloody story of science run amok.

 

"The Unnamable"(1998)--Basically a "monster kills teens fucking in a haunted house" film, director Jean-Paul Ouellette, however, manages to work in almost all of the original story's finer points. Kind of a decent popcorn film, and it creates a cool back-story only hinted at in Lovecraft's work. Check it out.

 

            Well, let me grab my bookmark, read some more, and pop this DVD of the "Masters of Horror" episode from Stuart Gordon into the player....





an appreciation of "The Good Sisters"

“a cuppedia in obscurum”

“The Good Sisters”—an appreciation

            In the Spring of 2009, I received a screener in the mail of “The Good Sisters”. I had asked the ever gracious JimmyO Burril for this after connecting with him via social media. I was a huge fan of “The Chainsaw Sally Show” and, after seeing: poster art, production stills, early reviews, and a full page ad in Fangoria, I was intrigued (especially since the be-all-end-all, no-questions-asked, posers-and-pretenders-need-not-apply, de-facto Queen of Indie Horror, Debbie Rochon was starring).

            I’m a sucker for “super-natural/occult” films (Hell, I even like that Clint Howard clunker “Evilspeak”), and “The Good Sisters” seemed to fit nicely into that niche. To say I was impressed would be a gross understatement…

No shit, I even had the screener copy, along with the short note that JimmyO wrote on the envelope, framed with a poster (criminally damaged by the fucking US Postal Service in transit) signed by Ms. Rochon and the incomparable April Burril that I got when I received my “commercial” copy that I eventually ordered (I absolutely HAD to have the full-on, signed copy). Yeah, I know, I’m a hopeless fan-boy…but with good reason!

            Have you seen this fucking flick?!? You should!!! To date, I have watched “TGS” 9 times in entirety (including the very cool “Dr. Gash” screening with April, Debbie & JimmyO in the chat room—that shit was EPIC!). A slow building, almost “Hammer-like”, modern gothic tale of sisters Breanne (Rochon) and Kindra (Burril) Good, the film is a skilled study in fantastic story telling. Masterfully paced with production values and a look that belies the film’s meager budget, “The Good Sisters” weaves a web of paranoia and impending doom that is punctuated by a fantastically creepy nemesis, David Calhoun as “Daniel Hopkins” (shades of Vincent Price’s Matthew Hopkins in “Witchfinder General”?) and a revelatory performance from April Burril that really shows a range and versatility only hinted at in “Sally”.

            There’s violence, gore, and a fantastic ritual scene with Rochon and Burril that positively burns the screen (also, there’s a completely gratuitous scene of the ladies changing that you just know JimmyO put in there as a cinematic “wink and nod” for all of us!). And, as is often the case with indie films, there’s limited sets, but JimmyO turns this into a positive by making the apartment scenes play into the claustrophobic/paranoid feel, that just deepens the mood (Polanski’s “Repulsion”? Yeah, sorta like that.).

            You know, I’ve already reviewed this film on NerdRemix, but it is such an undeniably fine example of all the things that are RIGHT about indie horror, that I felt compelled to blog about it. April Burril spreads her acting wings, Debbie Rochon turns in a performance that (I think) is among her finest, and the interplay between the two leaves you wanting more (dude—figure out an angle for a fucking sequel already!).

Buy a copy, buy it now, fuck it, and buy two in case one wears out! “The Good Sisters” is one of those films that NEEDS TO BE SEEN! BY AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE! Seriously fuckers, make it a “Cult Classic”, it needs to be.

"Kronanburg or BUST!!!"

I’ve had the distinct pleasure of reviewing quite a few anthology horror films from the world of indie film lately. The form is making quite a comeback, and rightly so, it gives aspiring film makers a collective marketing medium, and allows them to cross promote with other studios. “Psycho Street” (coming soon from R-Squared) is, to paraphrase “The Lord of the Rings”—one anthology to rule them all! Featuring segments directed by some very familiar names to followers on the indie fright scene, and includes thespians that are among the brightest talents in the genre.

            Last year, at the Motor City Nightmares convention, I was finally able to meet and chat with Muscle Wolf Production’s Marv Blauvelt, and first heard, in detail anyways, about the project. Marv’s enthusiasm for film making is equal to his talent as a writer and actor, so I was very intrigued when he passed me a screener for the Pete Jacelone directed segment “Hypochondriac”. A great short film, with plenty of gross-out humor, “Hypochondriac” featured an excellent ensemble cast that included (among others): Raine Brown, Allan Rowe Kelly, Zoe Daelman Chlanda, Susan Adriensen, and some great comic interplay between Marv and Carl Burrows. I posted a glowing review on NerdRemix.com for the short, and waited…

 

This was followed, a few months later, by a link to an online screening of “Lewis”. A blackly comic, over the top, amazingly paced and acted throwback, director Anthony G. Sumner cemented his growing reputation as one sick bastard with this twisted little gem. Truly standout performances from rising star Deneen Melody, as well as Susan Adriensen and Jerry Murdock as the demonic duo of “Sister Louise” and “Father Lennox” made “Lewis” a very memorable viewing experience, and again, another review was shot—and I waited (impatiently) for more…

 

Enter: HorrorHound, Columbus, this past Spring—Marv (who, by the way, has become a pretty awesome friend as well as an “industry contact”) introduced me to director Patrick Desmond and actress Kaylee Williams before he slipped me a blu-ray of the deliciously malignant “love story” that is “Anti-Bodies” (which had screened to rave reviews the night before). The aforementioned Ms. Williams delivered a harrowingly convincing performance in this segment, supported more than ably by Jared Degado, Brigid Macaulay(holy shit, she's hot!), the Barbosa twins, and the man, the myth, the Marv! Deviant sexuality, and aliens ratcheted up the “WTF?” factor in this final segment that delivered the goods in spades.

 

At long last, this past week, I received a package from MWP with the finished product—all of the above in their splendid, sick, fucked-up, gory glory!! With the added bonus of the wrap-around story, “Come On Down” starring some of the segment’s players, and beautifully brought together by one of the sexiest women on the fucking planet—Tiffany Shepis (seriously—she could seduce, like, a stadium full of guys with one wicked smile)!!

 

“Psycho Street”—take heed fuckers, THIS IS HOW IT’S DONE! Any genre fan will find plenty to love in this anthology, because there’s plenty of everything genre fans love!! And, hold on to your hats, my second 10/10 EVER!! Run, do not walk, to buy a copy when it drops!! Then, pop some popcorn, grab an “adult beverage”, and prepare to grin, wince, and cower in fear!! Kronanburg is my kinda town!!

            Thanks, and big ups to Marv for keeping me in the loop on every step (and, unfortunately, mis-step—this baby had a sometimes difficult “gestation” from what I’ve heard) of this amazing project, and for, along with Anthony Sumner, providing me with some of the coolest poster art in decades for each of the segments! They hang proudly in the “Tavern of Terror”—and to everyone involved, thanks for making one HELL of a wild, roller coaster ride of a film!

I’m Tom, and I’m a “Psycho Street” fan.

"Hey! Are you a 'film maker'?"

Something has been on my mind for a while now, so I'm gonna rant--at what point exactly does a person qualify as a "film maker"?? I'm asking this because apparently my definition varies wildly from some peoples'. I thought the stuff I review, defend and support was "independent" film. Furthermore, I thought that people who actually made films were film makers.  About a year ago, I was at a convention and met someone who's advice changed my whole outlook--ducking away from the commotion, this man asked what I was doing at the fest, I explained that I was sharing a table with two film makers, we had all made short films that year and released them together on one DVD--and we had sold out of them! I then remarked to this person that "I almost felt like I was among my peers for a second there" to which he replied "young man, did you have a vision of the story you wanted to tell, and then, did you translate that story onto the screen using everything you had available?", when I answered "yes", he told me "then you could be in a room with Coppola, Scorcese and Spielberg and you'd be among your peers--don't ever sell yourself short, there's plenty of people in this business to do that for you". With that in mind, I'll lay out a few things that sort of chap my ass about indie horror films (and the people that make them) and clarify my positions and opinions.

JUST BECAUSE YOU WENT TO (OR FLUNKED OUT OF) FILM SCHOOL DOES NOT MAKE YOU ANY MORE "LEGIT".
Seriously, some of the best indie films were made by people with a rudimentary knowledge (at best) of the process--the key to an entertaining film, horror or otherwise, is storytelling! And that, friends, can't be taught in any school--you either have it, or you don't. Film making is kind of like a great guitar solo--you can have all the chops in the world, but if you ain't feeling it, it's gonna be as entertaining as watching someone do long division. Passion for the story will shine through a mountain of technical glitches.

"MY CAMERA AND EQUIPMENT COST 10x WHAT THAT GARBAGE YOU'RE USING COST!"
Really?? So you used a RED camera and still made a boring, sterile, shitty film that pales in comparison to one shot on a VHS cam-corder, circa 1992? I'd demand your money back if I was you!! Or better yet, go on social media and rail about how people are morons because they hate your pristine, hi-def masterpiece (it's a whole lot cheaper than sending out fliers!). Maybe if chicks at film fests overhear you discussing your geek-gasm collection of gear, you'll get laid more. Hey, it could work...

"BACKYARD FILM HACKS" ARE NOT TAKING YOUR FUNDING AWAY!
If I hear one more self important fuck-bag whine about how Indie Go Go and Kickstarter are too flooded with half-assed projects that no one will fund a decent film anymore, I'm gonna fucking retch!! Browse those sites for 5 minutes--go ahead--if you can't separate the shit from the Shinola by reading the proposals in that amount of time, you should probably list something other than English as your primary fucking language!! If you've made a decent film with no funding, people will hear about it (Hell, I spend most of my free time making sure people will hear about it) and funding will come. The old adage "the cream always rises" is true in a lot of things, especially film. If you have a great script/idea/concept, and you have the right people behind it--it will work. Look at what people like Brandon Slagle, JimmyO Burril, and Jason Liquori (to name a few) have done with micro-budgets---see what I mean? I made a film for $40, edited and scored it myself and got festival play and DVD sales with it. Derek Huey has built a sizable and fiercely loyal following for "The League of Science" while spending, like, 5 bucks an episode. A budget will not make a ranconteur out of a boring douchebag--that's just unconscious knowledge!

YOUR "WELL IF HE HIRED 'REAL' ACTORS/CAMERAMEN/EDITORS ETC. HIS FILMS WOULD BE SO MUCH BETTER" LOGIC JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
FACT:"Real" actors cost money. FACT: Money is usually something up and coming indie auteurs have little of. While excellent acting can make or break a film, often people making their first, second, or even third film are using their savings, kid's college fund, or whatever they can scrape together to simply complete the film, and then possibly make enough money to make the next one even better. Precious few directors in the indie world are making a "living" at this godless endeavor, so if they can con "amateur actors" in their circle of friends to act int heir films--don't bag on them because they didn't hire you--root them on, maybe they'll be able to afford you next time. It worked for Romero!

So, yeah, guys & gals, STOP WHINING!!! Trust me, if you're passionate about what you're doing--it shows!! And I can say this with some conviction because I almost certainly have watched more indie/low budget/no budget/I'll-pay-YOU-to-watch-this films in the last 3 or 4 years than 95% of the people reading this have. And, as always, SUPPORT INDEPENDENT CINEMA!!
Oh, and the guy I spoke to at that film fest, that was none other than Lloyd Kaufman--so take his advice, and go "make your own damn movie"!!!


I'm Tom--I'll be here all week!

Krusty Klassick-"3 On A Meathook"

So, from time to time, I plan to review the seamy underbelly of horror/exploitation cinema, the not-so-new, cheap, sleazy, and possibly shitty films from years past to hopefully turn you on to something new to you or inspire you to revisit a crappy gem!! The inaugural title?? The shit-tastic "3 On A Meathook"!!

Enjoy weirdos!!!