John’s Horror Corner: Critters 4 (1992), finally bringing the alien man-eating Crites and a stellar cast into outer space.
MY CALL: The best violence, gore, effects and humor will always be found in parts 1 and 2. But, however inferior to them, this remains an entertaining, campy and somewhat worthy sequel to the franchise. MORE MOVIES LIKE Critters 3: Critters (1986), Critters 2 (1988), maybe skip Critters 3 (1991), Gremlins (1984), Ghoulies 2 (1988), Tremors (1990), Grabbers (2012)… maybe even Munchies (1987) and Hobgoblins (1988). Leprechaun (1993) is also a decent R-rated horror comedy follow-up for fans of Critters.
Of course, the Critters started out in space and came to Earth. But Critters (1986) was not a horror-in-space movie. Despite that, the Critters franchise took a turn and boldly had a movie setting “in space” well before Jason Voorhees, space Satan, the Leprechaun or Pinhead ever did—Jason X (2001), Event Horizon (1997), Leprechaun 4: In Space (1996), Hellraiser IV: Bloodline (1996). This is an interesting step considering that right before these movies, Poltergeist III (1988), Friday the 13th part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989), Critters 3 (1991), Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth (1992) and Leprechaun 2 (1994) took their small scale domestic settings to the big city.
FRANCHISE SIDEBAR: In part 1, a batch of critters escaped a maximum security “prison asteroid” and were followed to Earth by shape-shifting intergalactic bounty hunters. With the help of a teenager and the town drunk, they thought the threat was eradicated and Charlie (Don Keith Opper; Critters 1-4) joined the ranks of the bounty hunters. But remember how part 1 ended with a clutch of eggs? Well, after yet another deliciously cheesy Sci-Fi spaceship opening, the alien bounty hunters received orders to return to Earth and eliminate the remaining monsters. So in part 2, Charlie and bounty hunter Ug saved the town yet again. However, they clearly didn’t complete the mission successfully because in part 3 we actually begin again near Grover’s Bend, Kansas where this all started and end up in Los Angeles.
The last five minutes of Critters 3 (1991) are also the replayed first five minutes of Critters 4. Charlie (Don Keith Opper; Critters 1-4) finds critter eggs in the basement of the Los Angeles apartment building and gets an interstellar call from his old bounty hunter buddy Ug (Terrence Mann; Critters 1-4) informing him that they are the very last two of eggs of the species and they are to be preserved in a space pod that crashes into the building. Charlie haphazardly is trapped inside with the eggs.
A space salvage crew recover the space pod in the year 2045 with the critter eggs and Charlie inside—not unlike finding Ripley in Aliens. You’ll recognize a lot of familiar faces in this movie playing crewmen Al (Brad Dourif; Cult of Chucky, Curse of Chucky, Halloween I-II), Captain Rick (Anders Hove; Subspecies 1-4), Bernie (Eric DaRe; Twin Peaks, Starship Troopers) and pilot Fran (Angela Bassett; Vampire in Brooklyn, Contact, Innocent Blood). They get just enough personality for me to care (a little); Bassett gets an equally empowering and mildly exploitative shower scene, Dourif has some cheeky lines, and Hove is just despicable (and predictably gets what he deserves).
Director Rupert Harvey—producer (The Blob, Critters) of several films but director of only this one film—delivers the sequel we deserve after suffering through Critters 3 (1991). The baby critters are still campy and cute and menacing, there’s a great critter-in-the-mouth special effects scene that reminds me of the black cat from Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990), and the space setting works to our fun advantage. The on-ship computer (named Angela) is reminiscent of Alien’s Mother or 2001’s HAL, and TerraCor (those who want the critter eggs preserved) smack of Aliens’ Weyland Yutani. In fact, numerous scenes are modeled directly after Alien (1979) and Aliens (1986).
The best violence, gore, effects and humor will always be found in parts 1 and 2. But, however inferior to them, this remains an entertaining, campy and somewhat worthy sequel to the franchise.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Changeling (1980), a slow burn murder mystery and classic haunted house movie
MY CALL: This haunted classic better serves audiences seeking an engaging historic murder mystery over horror, as horror serves more as a setting. It’s truly more of an intriguing slow burn, with not a gory or terrifying moment to boast.
The film opens with a horrible accident and loss—the kind that likely inspired Pet Sematary (1989). After witnessing the death of his wife and daughter, music composer John (George C. Scott; The Exorcist III, Firestarter) is a husk of his former self looking to relocate, start a new job as a university professor, and rebuild himself. So he moves into a secluded historic mansion which quickly starts hinting us of its haunted nature.
After a few minor strange occurrences, someone warns John that “the house doesn’t want” residents and that it isn’t fit for occupation. But when he finds a secretly concealed door to the dustiest attic ever containing a cobwebbed child’s wheelchair and a hundred-year-old music box, you know things are due to escalate. Perhaps the most iconic scene is more telling than terrifying (but also a bit harrowing)—the scene involving his deceased daughter’s ball coming down the staircase.
With the aid of Claire (Trish Van Devere; The Hearse) from the historic society, John investigates the history of the mansion. He covers all the bases—newspapers and legal documents—until turning to a medium to conduct a séance. The ghost, it seems, seeks help.
Typically, only the most significant classics impress me in terms of cinematography (e.g., The Shining) and scoring (e.g., any Italian horror featuring Goblin). This film seems to capture both, along with excellent acting performances (also rare in the genre, generally speaking). George C. Scott works wonders on the screen, lending a sincere credibility to his character’s desire to move on after his loss and focus on his work.
This is not a fast-paced film—at least, not in terms of action or horror. However, in terms of timely revelations and intrigue, the pace is good for a slower-burn film. In fact, this film feels much more like a murder mystery in a soft horror setting than horror enshrouded in mystery. Director Peter Medak (Species II, The Babysitter) brings zero gore and little actual “horror” to the table. To those of you looking for a good scare, this may disappoint. But for those of you simply seeking a good intriguing mystery film for a rainy Sunday afternoon, this may be right up your alley.
Share this post:
This is actually my second review of the film. My first review was a little more silly in tone. CLICK HERE to read it.
MY CALL: This was utterly preposterously bad… and full of B-movie awesomeness! A woman births an evil 400-year old Native American dwarf medicine man from a giant tumor and this movie is taken (somewhat) 100% seriously while following The Exorcist (1973) playbook. MOVIES LIKE Manitou: Some would say The Exorcist (1973). But in terms of pure 70s horror madness, I’d sooner suggest such zany oddities of the late 70s as The Visitor (1979), Phantasm (1979), The Brood (1979), Tourist Trap (1979) and The Sentinel (1977).
The opening credits cultivate a false sense that your in for a serious film to be delivered with a straight face. But this ludicrous movie isn’t puling any punches in its fight against good taste. In the very first scene doctors are discussing a patient’s tumor, which is growing at the impossible rate of 7.3mm per hour—at which it would reach the size of a basketball in 34 hours. When one doctor refers to checking “all the books on tumors” the other doctor says: “I wrote them.”
Seeking comfort our patient Karen (Susan Strasberg; Mazes and Monsters) calls her ex-boyfriend Harry (Tony Curtis), a psychic hack who dresses like a Harry Potter villain and dances like a fiend. When Karen goes under the knife to have the tumor removed, things start to get weird. The “tumor” possesses Karen who utters incomprehensible sorcerous hisses, the surgeon tries to cut off his own hand, a possessed old lady across town does a rain dance and levitates, and a séance reveals that our tumor represents a Manitou, the immortal spirit of a 400-year old Native American medicine man.
So, after consulting a charlatan psychic, an actual spiritual medium, and the doctor who “wrote the books on tumors” but now says the tumor is a fetus, they turn to the man “who wrote the book” on Manitous, anthropologist Dr. Snow (Burgess Meredith; Rocky I-III, Twilight Zone: The Movie). Apparently, in this movie, the two men who “wrote the books on tumors” and “wrote the book on Manitous” are within reasonable driving distance. Convenient. But alas, this only brings more trivial exposition. So, when all else fails, they turn to a Native American medicine man.
This is one hell of a story arc. Normally you just briefly go from some initially doubtful source (e.g., the police, an expert in the field, a kid who witnessed something, or video surveillance equipment a la Paranormal Activity) to some sort of paranormal/supernatural expert (e.g., Poltergeist, Insidious, The Conjuring) who carries the remainder of the story. Here, the movie is as much about finding someone to help and identify the problem than it is about the problem itself—perhaps this is the reason this has been compared to The Exorcist (1973). I just hope that whatever Native American they find “wrote the book” on all things medicine man!
We learn that the Manitou becomes more powerful with each incarnation until reaching Gitche Manitou (nearly Godhood). But before he reaches such power, he gestates into Karen’s giant writhing hunchback until birthing itself like a slimy newborn foal. Between the aid of the medicine man, the birth scene and some other events, I can see the strong influence on Poltergeist II (1986).
The Manitou has a diversity of magical powers. He animates a dead guy into a zombie, he summons a lizard demon, he quakes the entire building, and he summons the Devil! The special effects are of variously bad quality, including a terrible rotoscoped lizard demon, a laughable indoor blizzard and a stupidly basic outer space set. Don’t get me started on the blob of light representing this “devil.” This stuff is bad. Really bad. But it’s really fun to watch. Oh, and the lasers…
Regarding this finale, let me just say that you haven’t lived until you’ve seen a needlessly topless Susan Strassberg on a floating bed shooting colorful cartoon laser beams from her Jazz Hands at a demonic afterbirth-entrenched midget in an extradimensional outer space setting while the “light Devil” hurls meteors at her. It’s as if the filmmakers wanted to combine the space sequences from Flash Gordon (1980) with the demonic possession scenes from The Exorcist (1973) and then add a dash of Saturday Night Fever (1977).
So if you want to get a little weird with your next movie night, go with The Manitou!
Share this post:
The MFF Podcast #168: Icebreaker and Snowmobile Action Scenes
You can download the pod on Itunes, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back and we’re talking about snowmobile action scenes and the 2000 B-movie classic Icebreaker. If you are into movies featuring legendary mountain burgers, angry bosses and a bald Bruce Campbell chewing scenery you will love every second of this podcast. What we love most about Icebreaker is how director David Giancola gathered seemingly everyone in Vermont to cameo in this movie while actors Sean Astin, Stacy Keach and Bruce Campbell channeled every ounce of their professionalism to endure the experience of being in a true B-movie. In this podcast, you will hear us talk about snowmobiles, frightening fight scenes and Alexander Payne directing movies based on Avril Lavigne songs.
Bruce Campbell has a lot of whiskey in this movie.
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 Itunes, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Satan’s Slaves (2017; aka Pengabdi Setan), the Shudder Original remake about an Indonesian haunting and a Satanic cult.
MY CALL: There’s nothing particularly original to be found here (and there’s nothing wrong with that), but it’s entertaining. This film is well-paced, rich with jumpscares, and good phases from scary to intriguing to more action in the end. MOVIES LIKE Satan’s Slaves: Not to be confused with Satan’s Slave (1980; the Indonesian take on Phantasm (1979) and for which this 2017 release is something of a remake) or the British film Satan’s Slave (1976). For more Indonesian horror, consider May the Devil Take You (2018; aka Sebelum Iblis Menjemput) or Kuntilanak (2017; aka, Ghost in the Mirror) for something more serious or Lady Terminator (1989) for a preposterously fun B-movie experience.
Writer (in part) and director Joko Anwar (Halfworlds, Ritual) approaches this Indonesian remake of the Satanic panic era classic Satan’s Slave (1980) in the same 1981 setting as the original. With her father struggling with the family finances, Rini (Tara Basro; Halfworlds) must be strong for her younger siblings and her terminally ill mother who is bedbound, practically mute and weakly chiming her bell for aid.
When the audience is in the horrorverse, there’s something particularly unnerving about bedbound terminally ill characters. Do they see evil spirits we cannot perceive? Are they the evil or possessed by an evil we should fear? I’m reminded of Annabelle: Creation (2017) and Pet Sematary (1989) in concept. Whatever the case, it lays a foundation of dread.
At first the horror imagery is typical to Asian haunting horror: horrified expressions on the face of the dead, creepy smiling ghostly figures, a well echoing dripping water and, of course, the continued ringing of the bell… after the mother’s death. For convenient flavor, Rini’s family lives next to a cemetery and the family’s poverty results in their loss of phone service as the father must travel for work—in combination, these factors credibly cultivate a sort of “cabin in the woods” isolation even though Rini seeks advice from other locals. In their father’s absence, they begin to suffer additional loss and trauma at the hands of an evil presence.
There’s nothing particularly original—in fact, one particular scene will remind you way too much of The Ring (2002) and the “living dead-ish” entities behave as we’ve seen them a dozen times before devoid of nuance. We enjoy standard jumpscare fare and, more often than not, we see it coming—but with good execution it feels far more fun than formulaic. In fact, the scares become quite frequent providing a jumpy-fun pacing to the film (it reminded me of Dead Silence (2007), but more eventful and considerably less terrifying).
The first act is heavily jumpscare-biased, then we shift into a more plotty portion of the film to pave the way for the quite eventful third act. We go over an hour with essentially no blood or gore, but there is one rather outstanding and gruesome death scene involving a truck which totally took me off guard (I was impressed). The effects focus more on the ghostly/undead appearance of these Asian deadite entities in the beginning—and they look good. Again, nothing particularly original and of highly familiar gestalt, but well-executed.
This was a fun watch and, for all the action and jumpiness, I’d recommend it for a low stakes Saturday night.
Share this post:
The MFF Podcast #167: Quantum of Solace and More Henchmen Advice
Daniel Craig and Olga Kurylenko star in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures/Columbia Pictures/EON Productions’ action adventure QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
You can download the pod on Itunes, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
The MFF podcast is back, and we’re talking about the Bond film Quantum of Solace. If you’ve listened to the podcast before, you will know that we love the Bond franchise and will take any opportunity to talk it because the Bond movies have so much personality. In this podcast, you will hear us talk about its rushed production, unfinished script and Jason Bourne mimicry that just doesn’t feel right. We also go in-depth into its positives (there are many) and wish Olga Kurylenko had a bigger role because her character is the most interesting part of this movie. If you are a fan of James Bond movies you need to listen to this podcast.
We love the hotel bit.
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 Itunes, Stitcher, Tune In, Podbean, or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Town That Dreaded Sundown (2014), a meta-sequel remake of the seminal slasher classic.
MY CALL: An engaging and fun movie experience introducing the younger generation to a slasher classic, but unable to deliver on its meta-sequel theme with an ending that falls flat. MOVIES LIKE The Town That Dreaded Sundown: Well, there’s the original The Town That Dreaded Sundown (1976). But for more transformative classic slasher movies, I’d direct you to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Black Christmas (1974) and Halloween (1978).
This film approaches the history of the Phantom Killer and the Texarkana Moonlight Murders of 1946 with a much more experienced hand. The introductory montage is effective and, thankfully, utilizes a more serious tone than the hokey-dokey 1976 original. We learn that in this metasequel, the 1976 movie The Town That Dreaded Sundown (1976) actually exists as a movie, as it is screened at a drive-in on Halloween 2013. Director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon (Glee, American Horror Story) continues the story 67 years later and, I must say, I was quite pleased with how he treated this follow-up to the 1976 classic with a pseudo-scene-by-scene honorarium.
REMAKE/REIMAGINING SIDEBAR: For more horror remakes, I favor the following: Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), An American Werewolf in London (1981), The Thing (1982; yes, this was a remake), The Fly (1986), The Mummy (1999; adventure genre), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), The Hills Have Eyes (2006), Friday the 13th (2009), Evil Dead (2013), Carrie (2013) and It (2017). Those to avoid include Poltergeist (2015), The Thing (2011; a prequel/remake), Cabin Fever (2016), A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), Night of the Demons (2009), Body Snatchers (1993; the second remake), The Invasion (2007; the third remake), War of the Worlds (2005) and The Mummy (2017; total adventure-style reboot-imagining). I’m on the fence about An American Werewolf in Paris (1997), Halloween (2007), My Bloody Valentine (2009) and Fright Night (2011), which are bad or so-so remakes (in my opinion) but decently entertaining movies.
Our first surviving victim and teen heroine Jami (Addison Timlin; Odd Thomas) is with her mother (Veronica Cartwright; Alien, The Witches of Eastwick, The Invasion) as Chief Tillman (Gary Cole; One Hour Photo, Vamp U, Cry Wolf) questions her about the crime. She is diligent, scared and credible as she conducts her own investigation while Texas Ranger Morales (Anthony Anderson; Scream 4, Scary Movie 3-4, Urban Legends: Final Cut) joins the local police bringing some dry humor along. Meanwhile Reverend Cartwright (Edward Herrmann; The Lost Boys, My Boyfriend’s Back) provides spiritual guidance while muddying the waters of the investigation and the young legacy of the original filmmaker (Denis O’Hare; American Horror Story, True Blood, Quarantine, The Pyramid) creates more meta-thematic leads (or red herrings?). So yeah, they’re trying to do a lot with the plot—maybe too much.
So, what did I like about this follow-up to 1976? I dug the style of the camerawork! Nothing ground-breaking; just effective, moving shots that breathe life into the once-tame classic. The 1976 trombone death scene was more stupid than creative (even if it depicted the sick mentality of the killer) whereas here this scene gets the brutal meanness it deserves, complete with over a dozen stabs with several tandem strikes on-screen—in my opinion, this is very redeeming. I was also happy to see the Phantom Killer depicted less like Leatherface (i.e., less like a mouth-breathing menace who stares at you long enough to give you a head start in your escape).
Yes, I loved the intro-montage and the camerawork. But what about the bad? Well, true to the original, our killer still uses a gun. As I mentioned in my review of the original, this just takes me out of it. But worse, our killer now talks—and, making him less a Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers and more a Ghostface or Freddy Krueger, he talks a lot. And talking is fine… if it adds something to the character. But alas, here it added nothing and all the same scenes could have transpired without the flat dialogue. Thankfully, this dialogue was limited to the first act (and the finale), after which he became the Phantom Killer he should be.
But for its shortcomings, this metasequel was (for me) a far more engaging and fun horror movie experience than the original. And, for those who care, it follows more contemporary horror filmmaking tropes—e.g., the inclusion of a graphic sex scene, abundant nudity, and more brutal death scenes. Despite the nudity, the Leatherface-like panting and breast-chewing perversity were not addressed at all. Some of the more brutalized simplicities include the severed head window break scene (a nice spin on a basic necessity for a killer’s entry) complemented by the victim’s bone-exposed leg break during her escape and water-balloon-bombing blood splatters. These small but appreciated flourishes add a lot to otherwise simple and otherwise typical scenarios.
The meta-sequel approach is certainly uncommon and yields much potential to stir audiences. Films like The Human Centipede II (2011) and Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 (2000) made excellent use of the stylish premise. Unfortunately, in this film it produces less critical interplay with the events between the protagonist and the viewer—perhaps largely because, like the prequel The Thing (2011), it essentially replays the original scene by scene with little additional substance. The concept was important at first, and then largely forgotten as simply “the events of the previous movie” to such extant that the big finale revelation had to be “explained” to us in great detail, and rather unnaturally by the killer much like how the Joker runs his mouth so long that Batman figures out how to escape some deadly convoluted scenario. Thus, the third act was the least exciting of the film, and that’s what people tend to remember the most. I wonder if that isn’t the sole reason this didn’t find a timely sequel.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Town That Dreaded Sundown (1976), basically the Texas Chainsaw LITE beer of classic slasher cinema.
MY CALL: Yes, it’s a classic. But if this movie was a beer, it would be called Texas Chainsaw LITE. Just take TCM and replace the dire sense of dread with a light feeling of menace. MOVIES LIKE The Town That Dreaded Sundown: Well, there’s the 2014 remake of The Town That Dreaded Sundown. But for more transformative classic slasher movies, I’d direct you to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Black Christmas (1974) and Halloween (1978).
In the wake of World War II, the once optimistic residents of Texarkana are rattled by a series of attacks in 1946. Local Deputy Ramsey (Andrew Prine; The Evil, Amityville II, Lords of Salem) assists Captain Morales (Ben Johnson; Terror Train, The Swarm) to hunt down the serial killer.
Purportedly based on a true story (presented in the movie itself, and actually based on The Texarkana Moonlight Murders and the Phantom Killer) and released directly in between The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Black Christmas (1974) and Halloween (1978), director Charles B. Pierce (The Legend of Boggy Creek, Boggy Creek II, The Evictors) approaches the heavy-breathing Leatherface stylings of Tobe Hooper and strongly influences the eventual The Prowler (1981), The Burning (1981) and Friday the 13th part II (1981). However, this film’s quality falls quite short of its peers of the time.
LEFT: Jason Voorhees, 1981
RIGHT: The Phantom Killer, 1976
Panting so hard that his crude mask flows back and forth over his mouth, our killer may seem hammed up as he brandishes a car’s torn spark plugs before a young couple now unable to make their escape. He stops and menacingly stares at them as they scream, providing every advantage for them to flee much as we’d later see done by Myers and Voorhees. But unlike the slashers of 1978 onward, this killer has no particularly great physical strength or unstoppability. Much as in Black Christmas (1974), he seems to just be a regular but crazy guy with a penchant for killing.
Typical of the era, the violent act of killing (or stabbing) victims occurs off-screen after giving chase. But this film tried a few times to be brutal, and probably sort of was for 1976 considering how few movies like this there were at the time. Of the first two victims, one is dragged through the jagged broken glass of a car window, and we learn (but don’t see) that the other had her back, stomach and breasts perversely bitten and chewed. But this film, unlike TCM, is also rather light and hokey most of the time with an almost Dukes of Hazzard (1979-1985) kind of humor. Moreover, with narration throughout the film and scoring akin to the tone of an old Disney movie along with very weak plot development, this almost felt like a long 1970s TV show episode of some cops chasing a rascally crook.
Despite the title, most of the film takes place in daylight—making for a far from dire atmosphere as this captured none of heaviness of Tobe Hooper’s daytime horror. Honestly, when the killer isn’t on screen the atmosphere is rather limp. And even when he is, it’s hit or miss at best. The fact that the killer occasionally uses a gun really takes me out of it, and the trombone death scene was more stupid than creative, even if it depicted the sick mentality of the killer.
I must admit that some of my earlier reviews of classic horror weren’t overly fair—e.g., I spat venom at Black Christmas (1974) for feeling completely un-intense when, truly, it practically created the slasher subgenre after Psycho (1960). Presently I try to focus on these now seemingly tame films (by today’s standards at least) and treat them more like art history as I did with Suspiria (1977) and The Hills Have Eyes (1977). But honestly, I felt that this film did very little well. And I muse the only reason it is referenced for its influence on subsequent slasher films may simply be by virtue of its release at the dawn of the “rise of the modern slasher” era (right behind Black Christmas). Still, it has left its mark in slasher cinema history and deserves some recognition. And that some is all I’m willing to afford it as it strikes me as inferior among its peers released several years earlier or past.
Share this post:
MFF Favorite Monsters: The Cotton Candy Glob and its Demise in Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed
Ever since Waterworld featured Kevin Costner murdering a random 2,000 pound sea beast for about 40 pounds of its meat, I’ve been intrigued by random creature death in movies. That is why I’m writing this piece about a random monster that received about 25 seconds of screen time in Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed. The Cotton Candy Glob was only featured for a short time, but its short life and death left a long lasting impact on me because it died brutally via being eaten alive by the film’s protagonists Scooby Doo and Shaggy.
.
I get that the monster is a jerk who was trying to murder a man and his dog. However, things go quickly awry for the monster, and he was eaten alive while yelling “I will give you cavities!” It was an insulting death because the Cotton Candy Glob was a monster who was destroyed by its prey. Writer James Gunn came up with a truly inspired bit and I love the combination of the creatures terrified face and how after they ate the monster Shaggy says “I’m thirsty, I need a liter cola monster.”
You almost feel bad for it.
What is the goal of this piece? This may sound weird but I wanted to know how many calories Shaggy and Scooby ingested when they ate this frightened creature alive. To do this, I read a lot about cotton candy and learned that no two websites have the same answer. So, I averaged the results from the websites and I guestimated the amount of cotton candy that made up the creatures body.
The cotton candy monster has some heft. which means lots of sugar went into its creation
Here is what I’m guessing.
- The magical monster is 15 feet tall and made of sugar and pink coloring. He is a big fluffy creature who is very unlucky.
- Scooby and Shaggy eat at least 75% of the monster. I don’t think they would leave a half eaten cotton candy carcass lying around. That would be disgusting. The majority of cotton candy left would be strewn about the floor in little lifeless clumps.
- According to my research, one pound of sugar makes about 25 servings. Thus, I’m guessing 50 pounds of sugar would have sufficed for the creature. Why 50 pounds? Since the creature is magical, there isn’t the typical amount of sugar that gets wasted due to machines and burning (thank you amazon reviews!). So, with the combination of magic and 50 pounds of sugar, I think that is enough.
- If Shaggy and Scooby ate at least 80% of the monster they would’ve consumed 35,000 thousand calories EACH (70,000 total). This math is a result of knowing that 50 pounds of sugar equals 87,000 calories.
- They ate the monster in 10 minutes due to their absence from the group not being overly long.
- World champion eater Joey Chestnut only consumed 21,000 calories in 10 minutes during his 2018 Nathan’s hotdog record setting performance.
- The metabolism and inner workings of Shaggy and Scooby Doo are truly impressive and defy all logic. I wonder what is going on in there?
- They showed zero concern about murdering a monster.
I had to show this picture again. The poor thing was terrified
Results? – They ingested at least 35,000 calories each in 10 minutes, while eating the 15-foot candy glob monster who seemed like it felt pain as its cotton candy flesh was being ripped from its body. I love Scooby-Doo: Monsters Unleashed because it is such a weird little thing.
There you have it! I’m hoping you’ve always had questions about this scene, and I hope I answered them.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Croaked: Frog Monster from Hell (1981; aka, Rana: The Legend of Shadow Lake), a boring cheesy frog monster movie.
MY CALL: Not even entertaining as a fun bad movie. Just a boring monster flick about an aquatic bigfoot with inordinate longevity. MOVIES LIKE Croaked: Frog Monster from Hell: For more amphibious fish men, try Shallow Water (2017), Humanoids from the Deep (1980), Cold Skin (2017) or Dagon (2001)—all are much better choices than this. And if you just want a so-bad-it’s-good low budget B-monster movie, watch The Alien Factor (1978). It has much more B-movie sincerity and is ridiculously bad.
An attractive scientist visits a remote lake to investigate a large frog-like fossil discovered by a young boy. Naturally, this lake has a history…
The movie posters for this B-movie are highly suggestive of something more exploitative. You’d almost expect the crass nudity and monster rape of Humanoids from the Deep (1980). Additionally, one may expect lots of blood and guts (even if on a very low budget with cheap effects). Nothing could be further from these expectations.
The movie begins with a 1960s-70s aw-shucks hokiness about it, magnified by light wholesome scoring you’d expect from an old G-rated family movie. Were it not for seeing someone stabbed through the torso with a harpoon, I’d expect this to be a kids’ movie at first. But even when the tone and scoring become more serious, it still never has the atmosphere appropriate for anything life-threatening.
The harpoon death scene occurs more than once, and is just as unexciting as the build-up to the lackluster kills… and I suppose just as unexciting as any other aspect of the movie. This really isn’t a good movie. The monster is a green rubber suit smacking all too hard of The Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954), only it seems more dated for its era as it clunkily throws women over its shoulders and walks them toward the water most likely for some reproductive demise.
The best part—and perhaps the only satisfying part—is when the frog man’s fingers are chopped off with an axe and continue to wriggle. The scare (however weak and cheesy), execution and effects of this scene were the best we’d see. Towards the finale a kid shoots the amphibious monster with a shotgun and it just explodes as if hit by a rocket launcher. A rather anticlimactic one-shot kill for something revered as an ancient Native American frog God. Director Bill Rebane (Blood Harvest, The Giant Spider Invasion, The Demons of Ludlow) does no justice to the folklore presented—just a dumb aquatic bigfoot with inordinate longevity.
Overall, I’d say skip this. Skip this even if you’re a fan of really bad movies. There are simply better options, or “worse” B-movie options that provide more laughable qualities.
Movies, Films & Flix 