The MFF Halloween Viewing Guide: Movies and Documentaries to Watch Before Halloween
With Halloween approaching, here are some horror suggestions to get you ready for the 31st. I made sure to add an eclectic mix of documentaries, zombie romances and movies that feature EXTREME body modification. Hopefully, you enjoy!
One Cut of the Dead (Shudder)
The less said about One Cut of the Dead, the better. Just know it’s about zombies, film making and a desperate director. You’ll love it.
Green Room (Netflix)
Green Room is my favorite horror film of this decade. The violence is ugly (the dogs….), the characters are likable and Patrick Stewart plays a great villain.
Crystal Lake Memories: The Complete History of Friday the 13th (Shudder)
You will learn a lot about the Friday the 13th franchise by watching this massive documentary. It’s a lot of fun and very educational.
The Blackcoat’s Daughter (Netflix)
Director/writer Oz Perkins is one of my favorite up-and-coming horror directors, and I really like how The Blackcoat’s Daughter features ugly violence, quiet moments and a gut-punch of an ending.
Tusk (Netflix) and Walrus Yes: The Making of Tusk (Youtube)
Tusk is a weird movie. I still can’t believe that Kevin Smith put everything he had into making a movie about a guy being turned into a walrus. After Tusk, watch the documentary that details its creation.
Day of the Dead – with commentary- (Shout! Factory TV) and The Dead Will Walk (Youtube)
George Romero is the best. That’s why you need to listen to his commentary for Day of the Dead, and watch the documentary about the making of Dawn of the Dead.
Train to Busan (Netflix)
Zombies on a train….need I say more?
The Perfection (Netflix)
The Perfection is a fun horror movie that goes for broke with its gore and plot developments that are simultaneously unpredictable and predictable (trust me).
Life After Beth (Netflix)
Aubrey Plaza is the best (watch Legion now), and in Life After Beth she plays a zombie trying to have a relationship with Dane DeHaan. It’s weird.
The Shadow of the Vampire (Amazon Prime, Vudu)
What if Max Shrek, the star of Nosferatu, was actually a vampire? You need to watch this movie about the making of Nosferatu.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Satanic Panic (2019), a low budget horror-comedy that packs a bloody funny punch.
MY CALL: It’s no gem of the era. But it tries, it lands well with what it has, and we have a strong cast including some well-known stars! MORE MOVIES LIKE Satanic Panic: For more rich people behaving badly, try Ready or Not (2019) or Society (1989). For more horror comedies, aim for Deathgasm (2015) and Housebound (2014).
On her first day as a pizza delivery girl, Samantha (Hayley Griffith) is stranded out of gas on a luxurious estate after getting stiffed on the tip. Hoping to beg for some gas money, she wanders inside the mansion and finds herself in the middle of a high society Satanists organization in need of a virgin sacrifice to summon the demon Baphomet.
First-time feature director Chelsea Stardust handles her humorous atmosphere well. The Satanists’ meeting feels like a millionaires’ social club led by the delectable Danica Ross (Rebecca Romijn; The Librarians, X-Men 1-3, Godsend) and I love the dry humor. This is comedy first, horror second. But its horror side celebrates blood and guts as best it can with its budget, and it does so tactfully.
As cheap as everything looks, the execution manages to satisfy. I, for one, enjoy any effort to show someone’s (victim AJ Bowen; The Sacrament, You’re Next, Hatchet II) entire digestive system being pulled from their mouth. And who doesn’t like seeing someone’s (victim Jerry O’Connell; Mission to Mars, Piranha 3D) heart baked into a souffle demon? We also have Voodoo doll-like scenarios, some general murder, and insidious orgy-ing. Even with the zealous effort in the gore department, this is not a technically strong film although it manages to be enjoyable if your expectations are properly tempered.
You really ought to know what you’re getting into before watching this. If you aren’t aware of the low budget indie-style film you’re approaching, you may have the wrong kind of expectations and be rubbed the wrong way. For example, the scoring is stiffly rudimentary. And the writing here is nothing excellent—actually kinda’ clunky and hokey, though passable. It’s what you might expect from a comicbook. But the cast’s congenial performance keeps it above water and prevents the writing from becoming a nuisance even to this critical viewer. And again, the greatest possible efforts were made with a small rubber guts budget.
Other members of the cast include: Gypsy (Arden Myrin; MadTV), Judy Ross (Ruby Modine; Happy Death Day 1-2), Kim (Jordan Ladd; Cabin Fever, Grace, Club Dread, Hostel II), Steve Larson (Jeff Daniel Phillips; Lords of Salem, 31, Halloween II), Kristen Larson (Hannah Stocking; Boo 2! A Madea Halloween), Michelle Larson (Whitney Moore; Birdemic I-II, Contracted II), and Gary (Michael Polish; Hellraiser: Bloodline).
I enjoyed this. It’s no gem of the era, nor is it anything anyone should pander “how did this not go to theaters?” But it tries, it lands well with what it has, and we have a strong cast including some well-known stars.
Share this post:
The Movies, Films and Flix Podcast #223: Ernest Scared Stupid, Miak and Terrible Trolls
You can download the pod on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or Spreaker.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back, and this week we’re talking about the cult classic Ernest Scared Stupid (AKA pure nightmare fuel). Released in 1991, Ernest Scared Stupid tells the story of Ernest P. Worrell (Jim Varney) battling a horrible troll. The movie wrecked many lives, and caused children around the world to fear and despise snot-covered trolls. In this episode, we discuss Miak, booger lips and a beautiful tree house. Enjoy!
If you are a fan of the podcast make sure to send in some random listener questions so we can do our best to not answer them correctly. We thank you for listening and hope you enjoy the pod!
You can download the pod on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean,or Spreaker.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
What Exactly is Authentic Bulgarian Miak? A (Mostly) Logical Explanation – By David Cross (check out his fantastic podcast – Award Wieners, in which he talks about Oscar-winning movies and matches them up with food).
“Ernest Scared Stupid”, inarguably the best children’s’ Halloween movie in existence (boo, “Hocus Pocus”) introduced the world to authentic Bulgarian miak, one of the most well-known foodstuffs in film history. This is a (mostly) logical explanation of the mysterious substance. Make sure to listen to the podcast episode we dedicated to this topic.
Is Authentic Bulgarian Miak Real?
Before we can explain what exactly miak is, we have to answer this question. We searched the Internet high and low for clues of its existence. With a heavy heart, we have to inform you that miak is not real. Take solace that your childhood was not ruined by this knowledge, only your adulthood.
Still, just because miak doesn’t exist in real life doesn’t mean we can’t make an educated guess as to what it is in the Ernest-verse. (Yes, with 8 movies there is an Ernest-verse.)
What is Authentic Bulgarian Miak?
This might shock you but according to our (mostly) logical examination of “Ernest Scared Stupid” and Bulgarian culture, miak is a yogurt-like substance.
Here is our exact definition:
Miak is a Bulgarian-style flavored yogurt sauce that is commonly eaten in the spring and served with a thin pancake.
This means that Ernest nearly beat Trantor by dumb luck. Talk about being on-brand.
To develop our definition, we created a list of assumptions that led us to our answer.
- Assumption: Miak is a seasonal product. Specifically, it’s a seasonal product that is difficult to find in autumn. This is implied when Ernest says: “I bet you didn’t think I could find any this time of year.”
- Assumption: Miak is enjoyed in the spring. This is the farthest season from autumn. We believe miak is similar to spiced apple cider. Yes, you can have it year-round but it’s primarily associated with autumn.
- Assumption: Miak contains some type of dehydrated substance, which is implied by the phrase “from concentrate” on the jar. The term “from concentrate” is normally associated with juices. But not exclusively. For example, condensed milk is an example of a concentrated dairy product.
- Assumption: Miak is a popular product, indicated by the word “original” on the jar. To us, this says that miak is popular enough that brands are fighting to differentiate themselves from each other. In the Ernest-verse, this might be the equivalent of Coke versus Pepsi. This has nothing to do with our analysis, but it’s worth adding to your head cannon.
- Assumption: Miak is probably a portmanteau of the words’ milk and yak. Again, this has nothing to do with explaining what miak actually is. We just thought it was funny.
- Assumption: Miak is easily throwable. By this, we mean that miak can be jettisoned from its container. We know this because Ernest was going to toss miak in Trantor’s face. The means miak is not a paste or paste-like.
- Assumption: Miak is viscus, probably gel-like. When Ernest drops the jar we don’t see a puff of powder. Neither do we see liquid slosh out.
- Assumption: Miak comes in a variety of flavors. Otherwise, why would the label include the word “plain.” This isn’t that important.
- Assumption: The jar is stoneware. We believe this is vital to understanding miak. In researching jars, we learned that this particular stoneware is commonly referred to as a “cheese crock.” For the curious, they are about $10 on eBay.
- Assumption: Miak is a dairy product. This is because miak is viscous and the stoneware is meant to store diary. However, miak is not a pure dairy product otherwise it would have a familiar name. This means that it’s mixed with something unique, such as herbs, fruits, or vegetables.
- Assumption: Miak is yogurt-based. Did you know that Bulgaria prides itself on its yogurt? We didn’t.
- Assumption: Miak is sweet. Bulgarians already have a traditional savory yogurt sauce — podluchen sauce. There’s no need for a second savory yogurt sauce.
- Assumption: Miak ingredients include sweet paprika, honey, and spearmint, all of which are associated with traditional Bulgarian cuisine.
- Assumption: Miak is eaten with a main dish, as it’s a sauce.
- Assumption: Miak is eaten with Bulgarian pancakes, which are a staple of the country’s cuisine and similar to what Americans think of as crepes. We selected pancakes because we believe they go best with a sweet sauce. Furthermore, there is evidence through the various Ernest commercials (which may or may not be canon) that our denim-clad goofball likes pancakes. This assumption also helps explain where Ernest got the miak; he probably knew a guy who supplied the hard-to-come-by sauce for Ernest’s hardy breakfasts.
When all of these assumptions are taken together, it’s clear that miak is like Ernest—a little weird and a little sweet.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Child’s Play 3 (1991), Chucky goes to military school and breaks his Voodoo rules in this serviceable sequel.
MY CALL: After the original Child’s Play (1988), these sequels definitely aren’t getting any better. Its victory is in continuing the story of Chucky’s pursuit of Andy without replaying itself, and it still manages a great opening and gruesomely memorable ending just like Child’s Play 2 (1990). MOVIES LIKE Child’s Play 3: The other Chucky movies most worth watching are Child’s Play (1988) and Child’s Play 2 (1990), and then I might skip all the way to Curse of Chucky (2013) and Cult of Chucky (2017)—not that I didn’t enjoy them all to some degree. There is also the excellent remake of Child’s Play (2019). Other quality evil doll films include The Boy (2016), Annabelle: Creation (2017), Dolly Dearest (1991), Dolls (1987) and Puppet Master (1989).
With Child’s Play (1988) and Child’s Play 2 (1990) occurring over a timeline of as little as one week, part 3 leaps eight years into the future where we find now teenage Andy (Justin Whalin; Serial Mom, Dungeons & Dragons) attending military school. And with Andy long in their past, the toy company men aim to resurrect their top selling item: the Good Guy!
Say what you want about these sequels. But even if you hate them, I’d challenge anyone to claim they weren’t impressed by the opening sequences of these films. Our returning writer Don Mancini (Child’s Play and all sequels) clearly loves his creation, and it’s evident in his storytelling. Each of Chucky’s (Brad Dourif; The Hazing, Child’s Play, Child’s Play 2, Curse of Chucky, Cult of Chucky) murderous misadventures are completely different, and each new story begins where the previous ended to gorily illustrate how the soul of Charles Lee Ray transfigures from one charred or melted Good Guy corpse to the next. This time, reverse time lapse of a melting doll depicts Chucky being reformed (a la Hellraiser) to wreak havoc on this sequel.
Voodoo Discontinuity SIDEBAR: In Child’s Play (1988) the rules were clearly established. Chucky needed to transfer his soul to the first person with whom he shared the secret of his identity, and he had to do it soon because he was slowly becoming “more human” and would be trapped in the humanized doll body. In Child’s Play 2 (1990) Chucky actually attempts and fails this ritual, realizing he was already “too human” to transfer. Yet now in part 3, he starts looking for Andy and explains “I gotta’ get out of this [expletive deleted] body!” He actually identifies he has a new body and can now reveal his secret to someone else—but this revelation came after Chucky explained he had to get out of that body. So, I guess we’re just looking the other way on that fallacy and assuming, once again, that Chucky has a chance to escape his Good Guy fate. Rules as presented, he can now just keep “bleeding” into new doll bodies to possess and hit reset on his possession deadline.
Much as was the case with Child’s Play 2 (1990), where this movie suffers most is the death scenes in the body of the film. Yes, the opening and finale sequences are great. But largely the death scenes are either basic and lacking impressive special effects (e.g., the yo-yo garrote strangulation death scene), or the kills are off-screen (e.g., the garbage truck trash compactor death scene). But I’ll give clever credit where it’s due. The heart attack death scene was a pleasant surprise of ironic humor and the barber (Andrew Robinson; Hellraiser, Pumpkinhead II, Trancers 3, The Puppet Masters) had the most memorable death—even if only for the line “presto, you’re dead.” But truth be told, the budget had little allocated to the deaths and everything allocated to Chucky himself (and he looks great even during an otherwise dull death scene), and his opening/closing special effects extravaganzas. Like when he gets eviscerated in that industrial fan.
Probably the lesser of the first three Child’s Play movies, getting less extraordinary with each release. But to rate this on its own merits, without comparison to its predecessors, I’d call it quite entertainingly serviceable. Great opening with a meh middle (slow pacing). Decent again at the end when the mutilated Chucky gore comes into play.
Director Jack Bender (Lost, Under the Dome) brought us a decent sequel. Chucky is a little like Leatherface (Texas Chainsaw Massacre) or Mick Taylor (Wolf Creek)—just plain mean and twisted and cruel. So if you want a mean popcorn horror flick, this is it! Like part 2, the death scenes are less impactful than part 1. Tact and restraint have been surrendered for Chucky’s one-liners.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Child’s Play 2 (1990), an inferior evil doll sequel that still manages to entertain, especially with its melty finale.
MY CALL: While distinctly inferior to Child’s Play (1988), this sequel remains perfectly entertaining when not directly compared to its predecessor. It does a good job continuing the story of Chucky’s pursuit of Andy with a new angle, and it still manages to deliver a great opening and a quite gruesomely memorable ending. MOVIES LIKE Child’s Play 2: The other Chucky movies most worth watching are Child’s Play (1988), and then I might skip all the way to Curse of Chucky (2013) and Cult of Chucky (2017)—not that I didn’t enjoy them all to some degree. There is also the excellent remake of Child’s Play (2019). Other quality evil doll films include The Boy (2016), Annabelle: Creation (2017), Dolly Dearest (1991), Dolls (1987) and Puppet Master (1989).
We begin immediately after the events of Child’s Play (1988). Like an autopsy of our possessed-doll killer (Charles Lee Ray), we observe the charred and largely-melted remains of our favorite evil Good Guy doll as it is skinned, stripped, gutted, buffed and refitted with all new plastic limbs and skin and face. Even new overalls and fresh batteries. Good as new!
With his mother in a psychiatric facility (after the events of part 1), Andy (Alex Vincent; Curse of Chucky, Cult of Chucky, Child’s Play) is placed in a foster home in the care of Joanne (Jenny Agutter; An American Werewolf in London, Dark Tower) and Phil (Gerrit Graham; TerrorVision, CHUD II, It’s Alive III, Chopping Mall).
But in no time, Chucky (Brad Dourif; The Hazing, Child’s Play, Dune, Curse of Chucky, Cult of Chucky) finds Andy and is back to his old routine of trying to Voodoo-shunt his soul into the little boy. For as we learned in part 1, Chucky needs a human host or he’ll be trapped in his doll form forever.
Inexperienced but capable director John Lafia (Man’s Best Friend) and writer Don Mancini (Child’s Play and all sequels) team up to make a perfectly serviceable horror flick. I enjoyed it—because it was fun (for a mean horror flick). But if we’re being honest, all the magic and dread of part 1 felt completely missed in the execution of this popcorn horror movie. The death scenes felt more generic and impactfully flat. Even Brad Dourif gives a lighter performance. Where were the growling screams, where was all the desperate snarling yelling? His lines didn’t help, but the character felt subdued compared to his unfettered introduction in 1988. Everything felt like an impotent attempt to be even meaner than before—and it fails at every turn. But despite that, Chucky is back and more cruel than ever.
Watch out for Greg Germann (Quarantine) suffering a “just plain mean” plastic bag asphyxiation death scene in the car, and the factory “eye installation” death scene. Deliciously gruesome and mean. But the cost is that all of the tact and restraint in Chucky’s execution are out the window. We know what he is and there’s no mystery left.
What’s most redeeming about this film is its bookends. The opening was an excellent way to reignite the sequel. And the finale takes place in the same origin: the Good Guy doll factory. Chucky tearing off his own hand and self-installing his wrist blade (a la Ash) might be the best part of the movie.
And when Chucky gets gooily melted in the factory and his head explodes into gory chum… it’s truly a glorious finish. Reminds me of a lower caliber execution of the dog scene in The Thing (1982) crossed with Big Trouble in Little China (1986) and The Fly II (1989). Funny how both movies end with burning or melting the poor fella’.
While distinctly inferior to Child’s Play (1988), this sequel remains perfectly entertaining when not directly compared to its predecessor. It does a good job continuing the story of Chucky’s pursuit of Andy with a new angle, and it still manages to deliver a great opening and quite gruesomely memorable ending. Consider it a good popcorn horror flick as long as you enjoy meaner-spirited horror.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Final Destination (2009), the worst of the franchise, but still watchable as a standalone horror flick.
MY CALL: If Final Destination (2000) is a great horror film, Final Destination 2 (2003) is a great horror movie, and Final Destination 3 (2006) is just a fun “flick,” then this fourth film falls into the same territory as a Wrong Turn 3-6. Yeah, you’ll have fun watching the death scenes and gore and tropiness. But if you compare it to its source material (i.e., part 1), you’ll be bothered by the lack of substance. MORE MOVIES LIKE The Final Destination: All the Final Destination sequels: Final Destination (2000), Final Destination 2 (2003) and Final Destination 3 (2006). As well as the Saw films (2004-2017) if you’re up for much more brutal death scenes.
Franchise SIDEBAR: Final Destination (2000) ended strong with Alex (Devon Sawa; Idle Hands), Clear (Ali Larter; House on Haunted Hill, Resident Evil 3/4/6) and Carter (Kerr Smith; My Bloody Valentine) having beaten Death’s design and finally enjoying a drink in Paris… that is, until they realize they made one mistake (in Alex’s seat diagram analysis) as death takes Carter and the screen goes black! When Final Destination 2 (2003) opens, we learn that the survivors of Flight 180 all ultimately died mysterious deaths except for Clear, that all of the victims of FD2 were connected to the survivors of Flight 180, and that they had also evaded Death’s plan (during the events of FD1). FD2 ended with the revelation that Death’s cycle had not ended and that they were still on fate’s “to do” list, only to have Final Destination 3 (2006) completely ignore FD2 and instead serve as a second direct sequel to FD1. Unlike its predecessors, FD3 leaves no question that no survivors remain in Death’s wake. Those four who thought they “won” all coincidentally finding themselves on the ill-fated Train 180!
Past opening sequences of the franchise included a sudden change in plane cabin pressure, an unforgettable interstate traffic pile-up accident, and a rollercoaster malfunction. Attending a NASCAR-like racing event, Nick (Bobby Campo; Being Human, Séance: The Summoning), Lori (Shantel VanSanten), Hunt (Nick Zano; Joy Ride 2) and Janet (Haley Webb; Teen Wolf) escape a massive race car accident that kills numerous attendees in the stands.
Thanks to a harrowing premonition, Nick saves his friends from the disaster along with George (Mykelti Williamson; The Purge: Election Year, Species II), Samantha (Krista Allen; Feast, Alien Presence) and husband (Phil Austin), a mechanic (Andrew Fiscella; Vacancy, Prom Night, Quarantine) and a major jerk (Justin Welborn; Siren, Beyond the Gates, V/H/S Viral, The Bay).
The opening sequence struck me as a decent spectacle (for a standalone horror movie), but packing some of the weakest execution of the franchise. Loads of deaths occur on-screen, but they’re all so incredibly quick that if you blink you’ll miss whatever just happened and so much attention was placed on the 3-D visuals that on your TV at home things will appear a bit basic (relatively speaking). Flaming CGI cars and concrete fall and then victims basically disappear under them instantaneously as if an Acme safe was dropped on Wile E. Coyote.
Director David R. Ellis (Shark Night 3D, Final Destination 2) returns to the franchise with the least engagingly written characters yet. These may as well be the victim line-up from Wrong Turn 3-6 (2009-2014). And that’s totally fine in death scene-driven horror movies—I’m just accustomed to a higher bar from the previous Final Destination movies. But, to be fair, the characters have been less and less impressive with each subsequent sequel. I guess this was to be expected. But this was a big drop-off from FD3.
The problem is that this sequel makes no effort to bring its characters together or for us to care about them at all. We leave the opening sequence and then people just start dying. And like FD3, Nick has premonitions throughout the film and he simply understands how to deal with them—i.e., exactly how the characters learned to in parts 2-3 by working together (which doesn’t happen here). It’s kind of obnoxious; like it’s insulting the intelligence of FD franchise fans and stomping out our fairest of expectations. I never cared about a single character.
I wasn’t impressed with the opening death scene sequence, but the launched tire that eviscerated that woman’s head was awesome (even if momentary). And while the death sequences feel less thoughtful and elaborate in this sequel, there is something cathartic in seeing a mean racist lit on fire and being dragged behind his car down the street. There’s also a startlingly abrupt Terry-esque (i.e., FD1) car-splat death. But the best death of the movie was the escalator scene.
We’re definitely missing the magical tension from parts 1-2 (even part 3). But the most satisfying sequences would include the hair salon death scene, and I did enjoy seeing the mechanic get “cubed” despite the weak CGI. The car wash scene feels hokey but just goofy enough to entertain. And the pool drain death is dumb but mildly satisfying since the shallow frat guy (Hunt) got it the worst—anal disembowelment. Hunt deserved it. He’s in a sex scene that is somehow less classy than Friday the 13th (2009; with Trent). Everyone dies in the end as if they had never escaped death in the first place. Not a very satisfying ending, although I liked the X-Ray death-o-Vision.
This felt more like some random horror flick than a FD movie for reasons best explained in this excerpt from the Final Destination 3 (2006) review: “…the chain reactions that build to the deaths seem rather uninspired, uncreative and unelaborate compared to FD1-2—and those were the very things that cultivated dread or even excitement; you know, the things that made these movies work! We no longer have that same “thrill of the chase” as Death creeps closer. And that’s a shame. But again, to be fair, once Death is upon his victim, it’s fun to watch.”
If Final Destination (2000) is a great horror film, Final Destination 2 (2003) is a great horror movie, and Final Destination 3 (2006) is just a fun “flick,” then this fourth film falls into the same territory as a Wrong Turn 3-6. Yeah, you’ll have fun watching the death scenes and gore and tropiness. But if you compare it to its source material (i.e., part 1), you’ll be bothered by the lack of substance.
Share this post:
The Movies, Films and Flix Podcast #222: Wes Craven’s New Nightmare
You can download the pod on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or Spreaker.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back, and this week we’re talking about the 1994 cult classic Wes Craven’s New Nightmare. This meta-horror film is the lowest grossing of The Nightmare on Elm Street series, but, it’s our second favorite Nightmare film because of how it made Freddy scary again, and attempted something truly different (it gets weird). In this episode, we discuss underworld water slides, leather pants and the logistics of setting up a fountain in a hellscape. Enjoy!
If you are a fan of the podcast make sure to send in some random listener questions so we can do our best to not answer them correctly. We thank you for listening and hope you enjoy the pod!
You can download the pod on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean,or Spreaker.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Warlock 3: The End of Innocence (1999), the only disappointment of the franchise.
MY CALL: Just plain terrible and completely unworthy of following up parts 1-2. MORE MOVIES LIKE Warlock 3: Well, of course, Warlock (1989) and Warlock 2: The Armageddon (1993). Some other “part 3s” that are decidedly inferior to their predecessors include Wishmaster 3 (2001), Ghoulies Go to College (1991), Leprechaun 3 (1995) and Pumpkinhead 3 (2006).
The opening scene is really unimpressive. Set in 1673 New England, this origin feels much like the story other two movies—which both involved time-traveling warlocks.
SIDEBAR about Franchise Continuity: This movie completely ignored that the events of Warlock (1989) and Warlock 2: The Armageddon (1993) as if they never happened. By my observation, they are 100% unrelated. The first Warlock (1989) was sent to the future to assemble a book that would provide access to Earth for Satan. The “second” Warlock (who looked and behaved identically to the first) also came from another time. Moreover, the first Warlock sought the Grand Grimoire whereas the second fled crystal-toting druids. Or is this more like the Leprechaun franchise theory that each movie featured a completely different Leprechaun (despite being played with the same personality and by the same actor)? Perhaps, and if so, then there are numerous different prophecies which can bring Hell on Earth and for each prophecy a similar-looking warlock to expedite it. Seems farfetched, but it’s the best working theory I’ve got here.
If you weren’t sure how bad this would be, just wait past the lame 1673 scene until the opening credit sequence music. Then, you know it’s bad as the 90s electro-alt-grunge soundtrack kicks into gear. This movie’s title sounds like an adult movie, and the sets, writing and acting follow suit. I’m actually surprised there weren’t way more sex scenes.
When art student Kris (Ashley Laurence; Hellraiser 1-3/6, Lurking Fear, Cupid) learns she has inherited the contents of her ancestors’ manor, she ventures to collect family heirlooms with her boyfriend and college friends (incl. Rick Hearst; Brain Damage). Soon after their arrival, our warlock (Bruce Payne; The Keep, Necronomicon: Book of the Dead, Howling VI) arrives posing as an architect-historian and tries devastatingly hard to chew the scenery as well as Julian Sands (Warlock, Gothic). Bruce Payne looks the part. But none could match Julian Sands and the writing and budget for this sequel leave Payne drowning in bad video-era B-moviedom.
The tropes rain down hard. Kris’ car won’t start for no good reason at all, a mirror casts twisted evil reflections that don’t lead to anything at all, a child’s voice whispers through the halls of the abandoned house, and a weird harbinger lady warns Kris “believe me, you don’t want to go to that house… Death’s in that house!” Ooof!
The first two Warlock films (especially part 1) were satisfying witch movies exploring different aspects of spellcraft, curses, the occult, mythology, rune stones, druids and visual magical displays. They had real protagonists, and really gory consequences to crossing paths with these diabolical spellcasters.
Overall, the depiction of magic here in part 3 offers little visual spectacle at all. There’s a gory (but brief) throat rip that could just as well be in a slasher film, a lame “shatter” death scene, some Hellraiser-ish imagery (with more BDSM and nudity than horror), and a lot of off-screen death. And little is more upsetting in horror than off-screen death!
The sets are cheap, the effects are generally weak, the writing is awful, the acting is horrible. The finale confrontation is upsettingly bad. Like, I was angry (but still 10% gigglingly amused) yelling at the screen at the stupidity before me. Most B-movies entertain with hokey creature effects or cheap but abundant gore. Nope, none of that here. This is the bad movie so bad that its only redeeming factor is its laughability. I’m actually kind of surprised there wasn’t a subsequent sequel called Warlock 4: In Space to follow Pinhead, Jason and the Leprechaun.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Annabelle Comes Home (2019), an entertaining but middle-of-the-road contribution to The Conjuring Universe.
MY CALL: Overall a fun popcorn flick that falls somewhere between Annabelle (for which I didn’t really care) and Annabelle: Creation (which was loads of fun). I have criticisms, but not really any major complaints. My only disappointment rests in direct comparisons to The Conjuring (2013), The Conjuring 2 (2016) and Annabelle: Creation (2017). MORE MOVIES LIKE Annabelle: Creation: Well, The Conjuring (2013), Annabelle (2014; podcast discussion of Annabelle), The Conjuring 2 (2016; podcast discussion of The Conjuring 2) and Annabelle: Creation (2017; podcast discussion of Annabelle: Creation) round out the better side of The Conjuring Universe. Honestly, I’d just skip The Nun (2018) and The Curse of La Llorana (2019). For more evil doll movies one may venture Dead Silence (2007), Dolls (1987), Dolly Dearest (1981), Puppet Master 1-5 (1989-1994), The Boy (2016), Child’s Play (1988), Curse of Chucky (2013), Cult of Chucky (2017), Child’s Play (2019) and even Poltergeist (1982; that evil clown was twisted).
The Conjuring Universe SIDEBAR: The Conjuring (2013) was so outstanding that Annabelle (2014) couldn’t be expected to measure up. Worse yet, evil doll movies practically make themselves yet Annabelle was an absolutely incompetent horror film that should disappoint fans of the genre whether they were birthed in the era of serious slashers, classic Hammer releases, or campy 80s slapstick gore-fests. The only way Annabelle made it to the big screen was by riding the tidal wave of hype created by its connection to The Conjuring. Then along came The Conjuring 2 (2016), which was clearly made more for the fans than the critics as it focused more on being excitingly jump-scary than on plotiness. This introduced The Nun (i.e., the demon Valek) and gave a fine nod to Annabelle. Following suit, Annabelle: Creation (2017) offered a mysterious wink harbingering The Nun (2018) and then finished transitioning us directly into the opening scene of Annabelle (2014). There was also The Curse of La Llorana (2019), which only fit in the Wan-iverse by its forced inclusion of Father Perez (Tony Amendola; Annabelle). This sequel begins with Annabelle being recovered and brought safely to the Warrens’ home, as if following the events of Annabelle (2014).
With Ed (Patrick Wilson; The Conjuring 1-3, The Nun, In the Tall Grass) and Lorraine Warren (Vera Farmiga; The Conjuring 1-3, The Nun, Orphan) returning as main characters, this feels almost as much like The Conjuring 2.5 than an Annabelle film. And with how randomly tropey the supernatural entities and their actions have become, it measures a bit shy of being worthy of either. But hold on, I’m not saying it’s a bad movie—just not a great franchise installment.
Babysitting for Ed and Lorraine’s daughter Judy (Mckenna Grace; The Bad Seed, Amityville: The Awakening), Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman; Tales of Halloween, Goosebumps 2) and her nosey friend Daniela (Katie Sarife) end up freeing Annabelle’s demon to unleash her evil influence on those unlucky enough to be nearby. At first it’s just a little startling. But eventually we get some good atmosphere and scares.
A wolfen beast attacks from the annoyingly thick and abundant mist, a murderous spectral bride terrifies the household, empty rocking chairs rock on their own, spirits pace out of focus in the background, evil animated shadows, oddly prophetic TVs, and then there’s the Ferryman… that dude is creepy! This Annabelle doll is, of course, also incredibly creepy. Influenced by a demon and serving as a beacon for lost spirits, Annabelle is a magnet of malady. Seeing her under the sheets of the bed (with you in it) was a joyous shock.
First-time director Gary Dauberman (writer; Annabelle: Creation, It, Swamp Thing) seems to have tried to capture the more varied and flavorful threats of The Conjuring 2 (2016). The demon Valek, the Cooked Man; both were well-storied additions to that 2016 sequel. Yet here our varied additions’ introductions held less gravity, and their subsequent sightings less impactful (beyond the excellent jump scares). But make no mistake. I may criticism, but this becomes a rollercoaster of dreadful frights and engaging jumps. It’s just that… remember when the shadowy silhouette of the dog transmuted into the Crooked Man? That will stick with me! Nothing really from this film will… although the blood vomit scene was certainly shocking even if brief.
Overall a fun popcorn flick. I have criticisms, but not really any major complaints. My only disappointment rests in comparisons to The Conjuring (2013), The Conjuring 2 (2016) and Annabelle: Creation (2017).
Movies, Films & Flix 