The House that Cried Murder (1973)

This 1970s obscurity somehow weaseled its way to the top of my Netflix queue and let me tell you, this House is one fixer-upper!

Wealthy daddy’s girl Barbara builds an ugly, modern monstrosity just cuz she is bored and wants to truly do something with her life. She plans on moving into the house with her boyfriend, the slimy David, who works at the same firm her father owns. Despite warnings from her father that David “stinks”, Barbara gets her way and ties the knot with David. Daddy’s little girl should have listened to her father, because David really does stink! The adulterous asshole sneaks off during their wedding reception with his ex-girlfriend. Sure enough, Barbara finds him pants down in the bedroom! Barbara takes a pair of scissors to David’s arm before storming off through the wedding guests with a bloodied wedding gown and burning rubber out of there. She disappears, and neither David nor her father hears from her for days or weeks. Despite the tumultuous events of the wedding day, Barbara’s father is overly chummy with David and tells him from now on will be treating David like a son. Meanwhile, David and his ex have re-connected after their lousy rendezvous and are apparently living together. Their bliss is short-lived when they are terrorized in their own home by ominous phone messages, severed chicken heads and expensive bridal gowns.

The House that Cried Murder is one stinker of a movie. First off, the transfer is so bad that the film is littered with scratch marks, weird jump cuts and switches between being too dark or too washed out. Now, I’ve seen plenty of old films in all different states, but this is one of the worst-looking ones I’ve ever seen. Furthermore, the actually lighting in the film is nonexistent, leaving actor’s faces perpetually drenched in shadows while the rest of the surroundings are washed out. I could have overlooked all this had the film actually been decent, but it just drags on and on with no real tension or scares to speak of. Barbara may be crazy, but at least she isn’t the annoying little twat that David’s ex is…good God, I just wanted her to meet a terrible demise but I was denied even that as she is scared off by the chicken head, phone calls and other shenanigans that start to plague her and David.

The film is packed full of more filler than your average hot dog, with pointless scenes of David and his ex strolling a street fair, Barbara and David walking through a field, and so on. This film really needed to get to the action already. Only, I guess there really wasn’t too much action to really get to, now was there? The climax and ending of the film feature a neat little twist, but getting there was absolute torture and the ending doesn’t make up for the boredom I suffered sitting through this dilapidated House. I just wanted this wretchedly boring movie to end…maybe they should call this The House that Cried Uncle instead.

If you are an absolute fiend for bad ‘70s movies (with bad music to match, natch) and this is one you haven’t seen before…well, I would say to skip it anyways. However, if you are a masochist, by all means check this film out; but in my opinion this House should be condemned!

Order it on Amazon!

Alucarda (1978)

Alucarda is an unheralded gem and even within the horror community I don’t think too many people are familiar with this Mexican film by Juan López Moctezuma. This is a pity, because the film boasts beautiful visuals, controversial themes and violent deaths.

Alucarda is about two teenage girls living in a Catholic convent that also serves as an orphanage. Justine arrives at the convent after her parents die, leaving no one to care for her. Taken in by the nuns (who wear weird, mummy-like wrappings) Justine is placed in a room with Alucarda and the two girls quickly become inseparable. On a walk in the forest one day, they happen on a band of gypsies selling charms and trinkets. After a gypsy tells Alucarda and Justine they have only darkness in their future, the girls run away and stumble upon an enormous old crypt in the middle of the woods. While they are exploring, they open an old coffin and unleash a demonic force that possesses them. Back at the convent, the demonic force is unleashed upon the kind nuns and other inhabitants.

The visuals of the film border on gothic, with misty forests, decrepit crypts and Catholic imagery. The convent itself is lit by flickering candles and its sparse, utilitarian rooms are only decorated with crosses. Its church has rows upon rows of crosses, each fitted with an agonizing Christ. The stone crypt that the girls explore is festooned with faded red banners, creepy statues and lots of vines growing over everything. The gothic feel is reminiscent of many old Hammer films, with the subject matter just being a bit more dark and controversial.

For its time, the film was controversial, as it dealt with lesbianism, Satanism, sacrilege, the occult and more. While these themes are considered “tame” today, don’t be mistaken – the film still packs a punch. From a kiss that turns into Alucarda licking the blood off a naked Justine, to a gypsy Satanist that can invoke the Devil, to bloody psychic nuns to midnight orgies, to reanimated corpses to a fiery, Carrie-esque conclusion, this film will definitely keep your attention.

However, I feel like the above paragraph also does a disservice to Alucarda, as it is as not as exploitative as it may seen. The arresting visuals, engaging storyline and multi-layered themes heighten the film and make it into something much more substantial than your standard exploitative occult flick. The themes of evil corrupting even the most innocent, but also of redemption and ultimate faith, will resonate with viewers, regardless on their view of religion.

Alucarda is an underrated gem, and one that more fans of classic horror should definitely seek out.

Buy it on Amazon!

A Whisper in the Dark (1976)

I gotta tell you, I love slow-burning, mysterious ghost stories. The psychological impact of such films leave me wanting more, so I eagerly seek out titles I’m unfamiliar with. Such was the case with A Whisper in the Dark (aka Un Sussurro nel Buio), a 1976 production from Italy.

In this film, a wealthy family is vexed by the existence of Luca, the imaginary friend of their 12-year-old son Martino. Mother Camilla is affected the most, so much that her nerves are shot. It doesn’t help that she has two bratty daughters, or that her mother, The Countess, is visiting the mansion and her husband is a philandering fool. However, everyone soon begins to fear Martino and his imaginary friend Luca.

Why you ask? Well, it seems that anyone who has anything bad to say about Luca or Martino has something bad befall them. For example, when his sisters play a trick on him, Martino tells them Luca will get back at them. That afternoon, the sisters are to attend a party but it starts pouring rain. Even when they try to attend, their car gets a flat tire. In another instance, Martino discovers his father is having an affair and the adulteress is scared away by a toad placed in her bath.

Pretty tame stuff, but it spooks the family enough that they bring in an “expert” to analyze Martino. When the professor threatens to take Martino away he mysteriously dies. Are all these instances mere coincidence or does Luca really exist?

A Whisper in the Dark starts off very strong. It has the creepy atmosphere of the surrounding countryside and forest, plus the foreboding mansion that lend it much gothic beauty. Then there are some spooky scenes, including Martino “interacting” with Luca, an artful shot of a lone red balloon floating through the gardens, the light sound of a child laughing, a swing swinging on its own, a weirdly unsettling kid’s costume party and a very effective scene where Camilla is kissed by invisible lips.

There is no doubt that the film is beautiful, lushly shot by director Marcello Aliprandi and cinematographer Claudio Cirillo (who actually plays a detective in the film and also does a cute intro before the film!). However, the film never really goes anywhere and the creepy scenes are far and in-between. Mostly we see the family interacting (dear lord those sisters are grating! If I was Luca I would have gotten rid of them long ago) instead of any real ghostly activity. And the fact that there is only one death was pretty disheartening. Of course, since the film is so ambiguous this is supposed to make us question if Luca really exists or if everything is just unhappy circumstance, but for me this wasn’t enough.

While I enjoyed the psychological games the film played with the audience, I just wish a little bit more had been done to scare the audience instead of puzzle them. The ending gives no resolution, but repeats a similar pattern of Martino telling everyone that Luca prefers peach jam on his toast, not plum (yes, a table setting and food is laid out for the invisible Luca). Previous to this scene is a bizarre dream-like sequence where Camilla decides to take care of Luca’s ghost (since he may be her own miscarried child) for herself and through fog and snow leads him out of the mansion’s gates. The next morning she wakes up on the muddy ground (sans snow or fog) and finds Luca back to his old tricks at the breakfast table. So much for resolution…

A Whisper in the Dark is a film I desperately wanted to love. Ghost stories are my absolute fave and the right ones send a delightful shiver down my back, but this film only left me mildly interested. While it is a beautiful film and has its unsettling moments, more should have been done with it. If you are like me and like subtle, atmospheric horror it does deserve at least a look, though!

Available from Amazon!

Shock (1977)

Shock was legendary director Mario Bava’s final film before his death. That right there should be enough reason to get anyone to check this film out, but luckily it’s also a fine film that lives up to its title!

Shock is about a family – Dora (Daria Nicolodi), her son Marco (David Colin Jr.) and new husband Bruno (John Steiner) – who move into the old house Dora shared with her first husband/baby-daddy Carlo (Nicola Salerno). It seems that dear old Carlo was an unstable piano player and died under mysterious circumstances, leaving Dora very traumatized. When Dora and her new family settles into the house, strange things start to occur – furniture moves of its own free will, Dora suffers intense nightmares and little Marco starts to behave rather oddly. Is the move back to the house causing Dora to go a little mad or has Carlo come back from the grave to torment his ex-wife?

Surprisingly, I had never seen Shock before (I don’t know how it slipped by me since I’m a huge Bava fan!), but I’m so very glad I finally got around to watching it because Shock was everything I was hoping it to be! It is full of creepiness, scares, and yes, even shocks!

I loved how it blended the is-she-crazy-or-isn’t-she storyline along with the supernatural/haunted house theme AND the creepy kid bit. Not only that, but it blended these different sub-genres successfully. The film flowed smoothly and all these different storylines fit together very well.

There were also some truly memorable scenes, including one where a rotting hand strokes Dora’s cheek as she sleeps, some disturbing sexual advances young Marco makes towards his mommy, a nice scare involving a rotting hand bursting through the grass, razors hidden between piano keys, a basement that leaks blood and so on. The evocative score also helped build a sense of dread, as did the forebodingly dark lighting throughout the film. Even when the action is set outside a dreary pallor hangs over the film, echoing Dora’s fragile state.

The action was primarily focused on Dora and Marco (hubby Bruno is a pilot, so he was usually away for days at a time), which in the hands of lesser director might get boring In Shock this is certainly not the case and my eyes were glued to the screen watching as Dora spiraled into a hysterical state and things became progressively worse in the household. It also really kept me guessing and the conclusion, which is carefully hinted at, was extremely satisfying, ending on a decidedly downbeat tone. Acknowledgement should also be given to actors Daria Nicolodi (a fan favorite in Italian/Euro horror), David Colin Jr. and John Steiner. Had there performances not been up to par they really would have dragged the film down, but luckily they were all at the top of their game. Nicolodi and Colin Jr. must especially be recognized since, as mentioned above, they were the main focus of the film. Nicolodi was excellent as the caring but unstable mother and Colin Jr. was downright creepy (and a little bit sleazy) as the young son. Really impressive acting from Colin Jr., especially considering his young age!

Shock kind of lacks Bava’s visual flair from earlier films, but that doesn’t make it any less effective. As a modern haunted house/ghost story the austere visuals work quite well and I think any kind of flashy visuals would have taken away from the story. Plus, there are plenty of memorable scenes (those mentioned above, as well as many more) without the need for Bava’s typical gothic and/or over the top stylings.

Shock may not be Mario Bava’s most sophisticated work, but it definitely is a film that creates a sense of creeping uneasiness that is extremely effective. And you just can’t go wrong with flying razors and a kid possessed by his own dad putting the moves on his mom!

Available from Amazon!

The Killer Must Kill Again (1975)

Expecting another typical giallo, I was surprised to find how sadistic The Killer Must Kill Again really was. This is definitely not your standard Italian giallo, but something much more sinister and disturbing.

It begins with Giorgio (George Hilton) being nagged by his crazy, but rich, wife Norma (Tere Velázquez). Going out for a drive, Giorgio witnesses a serial killer (Michel Antoine) dumping a body, so he then blackmails the killer and hires him to kill his bitchy wife, making it look like a kidnapping so her rich daddy will pay the ransom.

Well, during the kidnapping/murder things go awry as two kids (Alessio Orano and Cristina Galbó) steal the serial killer’s car…with the body of Norma in the trunk. The serial killer then tracks the two kids down to a seaside town where he indulges in some sadistic revenge.

I wouldn’t call The Killer Must Kill Again a giallo, but rather a mean-spirited and violent crime thriller. First off, we know who the killer is all along, so we don’t have the standard giallo whodunit. Secondly, the killer is only after the two kids, so all other victims are people that get in his way. However, the film is just as suspenseful besides these facts and does a wonderful job at ratcheting up the tension while we anxiously wait for the killer to catch up to the two oblivious teens.

While we wait for the killer to arrive, we begin to feel closer to the two teens, making what subsequently happens to them (especially the innocent character that Cristina Galbó plays) all the more hard to watch. When the killer arrives, he finds the virginal girl all alone in an abandoned house (her loverboy is off getting busy with a slutty local, played by Femi Benussi, but annoyingly dubbed – almost to the point where I wanted her to hurry up and die). The killer brutally rapes her in a very uncomfortable and shocking scene that cuts back and forth between the chilling rape and her boyfriend getting it on with the other woman. You are simultaneously disgusted and titillated by the two different scenes, making for a very awkward viewing experience. Kudos to director Luigi Cozzi for making us feel such dissonance with this scene!

Besides the character development that makes us feel for the victims, I thought the actors also did a wonderful job. The real standout was Michel Antoine (aka Antoine Saint-John) as the killer. Not only were his cold, chiseled features scary, but his silent demeanor was also menacing. Without his stoic performance the film might have fallen apart, but he owned his role as a sociopath. The other actors were equally good, though George Hilton faded into the background when the killer/kids storyline took precedence. I especially liked Cristina Galbó as one of the kids – she brought such innocence to the role! I also thought the handsome Alessio Orano did a great job as the sleazeball boyfriend.

Though the likable kids suffer thoroughly at the hands of the killer, their outcome is not as expected. I also liked the tidy wrap-up at the end of Giorgio’s storyline, but after witnessing such disturbing violence I had hoped the ending would have a bit more resonance. While The Killer Must Kill Again has its fair share of nasty brutality (especially towards women), its ending was a bit too “happy” for me. It is a solid film, but probably one I’ll only watch once. Take that to mean what you will…

Available from Amazon!

Squirm (1976)

Killer worms…yup, you read that right. That is pretty much the premise of Squirm, a B-movie from writer/director Jeff Lieberman (Just Before Dawn, Satan’s Little Helper, Blue Sunshine). While this is no doubt one of Lieberman’s worst horror films, it still holds a certain campy charm and should be viewed at least once for its over-the-top and silly story.

From the opening scenes of extreme close-ups of worms screaming (yup…screeching their little tails off!!), you know you’ve entered campy territory! We are then introduced to the main characters after a huge storm has hit their backwater Southern town. They don’t know it yet, but lightening from the storm fried all the worms in the vicinity and made them angry little buggers hungry for flesh! Meanwhile, a city slicker named Mick (Don Scardino) arrives in town to visit his girlfriend Geri (Patricia Pearcy). Mick and Geri keep stumbling over dead bodies, stripped down to the bone, and Mick is determined to solve this strange mystery. He suspects his girlfriend’s next door neighbor, Roger (R.A. Dow) who just so happen to run a worm farm, and starts nosing around for evidence or clues. The townspeople don’t take too kindly to this outsider, so when he discovers that killer worms are behind the murders, no one believes him. It’s up to Mick and Geri to find a way to stop the flesh-eating worms, but will they be able to make it out alive?

Make no mistake, Squirm is an awful movie, but it’s also one of those so-bad-it’s-good flicks that make for a fun viewing experience if watched within the proper state of mind.

Let’s get all the bad elements out of the way – first of all, the acting is atrocious! The actors play the Southern characters completely over the top and, good God, their accents are awful! None of the actors (save for the guy who plays the Sheriff) were Southern and their terribly twangy and grating “accents” can attest to that! Besides the accents, most of the characters were just annoying and I didn’t care whether they lived or became worm food.

Secondly, the plot has lots of unbelievable elements (a dude from New York is really gonna come alllllll the way to a backwoods Southern town to slum it with a small-town girl? Really???) not to mention the silly premise of electricity turning worms deadly.  ‘Nuff said.

Third, the pacing during the first part of the film is off and nothing much happens until 45 minutes or so in…the first part where Mick runs around looking for clues feels more like a Scooby Doo plotline than anything else, and gets pretty boring.

Despite all these problems, a certain charm worms (I couldn’t resist) its way into the film. A surprising scene involving worms burrowing into someone’s face is pretty shocking and the scenes of a massive army of glistening, squirming worms invading a house are impressive and cringe-worthy.

This was one of director Jeff Lieberman’s earlier films and despite its campiness (intentional or unintentional) I am glad that he went on to film more straight-faced horror like the underrated Just Before Dawn as well as other “outrageous” horror films like Satan’s Little Helper. While Squirm isn’t his best work, it is still pretty gosh darn entertaining!

Go ahead and open this can of worms (sorry…had to be done!)!

Available from Amazon!

The Legacy (1979)

Always a sucker for ‘70s thrillers set in old mansions with an occult/satanic twist, I decided to check out The Legacy, a 1979 flick starring Sam Elliott and Katharine Ross. While it focused less on the occult than I expected and was set up more of like a murder mystery whodunit, I found myself enjoying The Legacy, creepy cats and all (more on this later).

The film is about Los Angeles architect Margaret Walsh (Katharine Ross) who receives a mysterious job offer from England. Before her job starts, she and her boyfriend Pete (Sam Elliott) embark on a bike ride through Europe, but trouble starts when an accident puts their fate in the hands of the wealthy Jason Mountolive (John Standing), who insists they recuperate at his sprawling estate. Soon, other guests begin arriving and Margaret realizes she may have been handpicked and brought to the estate to inherit a sinister legacy. As various guests begin dying off, can Margaret and Pete escape before it is too late?

As far as 70s satanic films go, The Legacy pretty middle-of-the-road. It’s not one of the best but it’s certainly not one of the worst. However, I appreciate that it’s not your typical satanic cult film and not a lot of emphasis is placed on the “black magick” aspect of the film. Instead, it focuses on the mystery of why Margaret is part of the proceedings and who is going to die next.

The story takes a while to get going, as the first 30 or so minutes are spent on Margaret and Pete exploring the estate and puzzling over the other guests and the rather unhelpful help. The “mystery” as to why they are there and why guests are dying is pretty obvious, but it’s still fun to watch them slowly piece it all together.

Of course, it has its WTF moments – like the horrible opening credits that feature the worst song EVER to assault my ears in a horror movie, or the copious shots of cats throughout the estate (which are never really explained, though I guess they are Mountolive’s or the Devil’s minions keeping an eye on things), or repetitive shots of Margaret and Pete driving round and round on country roads trying to escape but somehow always ending up at the estate – but it also hosts some neat-o moments. The first death, featuring a drowning in a pool, comes pretty unexpectedly and jars you awake after the somewhat slow first 30 minutes of the film. There is also a scene that occurs a bit later featuring a rock star (played by Roger Daltrey) choking on a chicken bone and an emergency tracheotomy being performed on him that’s quite well-done! And who can forget the reveal of Mountolive on his deathbed?

Sure, the gore is non-existent and some of the deaths are a little cheesy (especially the one where Charles Gray’s character burns to death), but director Richard Marquand (who would go on to direct 1983’s Return of the Jedi) does a pretty good job of delivering an atmospheric, not-quite-satanic occult/supernatural story. The use of the mansion, with its labyrinth of seemingly never-ending rooms and grounds, creates a creepy atmosphere as the estate takes on a character all its own. Marquand even creates a claustrophobic feeling, even with all that space, that makes the audience feel as trapped as the guests. And the ending just feels pitch-perfect in a dark, twisted way!

The Legacy is an entertaining, though at times cheesy, occult flick from the ‘70s. From the awful opening music number to the silly “sinister” shots of cats (yeah, WTF?!) this movie had me giggling most of the time, but it also had its moments of tension and shocks and was entertaining throughout it’s hour and a half running time. It may not be entirely memorable, but The Legacy decides a look at least once!

Available from Amazon!

The Devil's Nightmare (1971)

Another little seen Satanic film from 1971 is The Devil’s Nightmare (La Plus Longue Nuit du Diable) aka Castle of Death aka Nightmare of Terror aka Succubus, etc., etc. Usually only familiar in Euro-sleaze or Euro-horror circles, The Devil’s Nightmare is a surprisingly entertaining flick dripping with gothic atmosphere and surreal scenes.

The film begins during WWII, where the Baron’s wife is giving birth. Upon learning that the babe is a girl and that his wife died in childbirth, he stabs the baby to death. Quite a shocking opening from a 1970’s film!

We then jump ahead a few years, where a reporter is interviewing the Baron in his dark and dreary castle about his family’s past. He seems to think his family is cursed, having made a pact with the Devil centuries ago that states the oldest daughter of each generation must serve the devil by becoming a succubus (and explaining the earlier scene where he killed his daughter). After this illuminating interview, the reporter makes the mistake of tarrying too long taking photographs of the castle and meets a grisly end. We then meet a group of travelers who are forced to take refuge in the Baron’s castle after becoming lost and taking directions from a creepy, corpse-like man. Each of these seven travelers is supposed to represent one of the Seven Deadly Sins (Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, and Pride), though some are easier to distinguish than others.

That night, they are introduced to a mysterious visitor (played by stunning redhead Erika Blanc, known for her sleazy Euro-horror roles in films like The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave and Kill, Baby… Kill!), who begins to lead each traveler down the road of temptation! Turns out she is a succubus and lures the sinners to their damnation with their specific vices. The only one who doesn’t fall under her decadent-but-deadly spell is the lone priest in the group, but can he stop her and the Devil before all their souls are damned to Hell?

While the story, written by Jean Brismée (who also directed) and Pierre-Claude Garnier, seems like a pretty straightforward allegory inspired by medieval morality tales, it also features a surprising and clever twist ending. I definitely didn’t see the ending coming, and when it actually happened it threw me for a loop! Quite the wicked little surprise that shows you should never make a deal with the Devil! Besides the ending, the story is kept lively by the colorful and sinful characters, keeping the audience rooting for their deaths! There is the annoying married couple, with the sleazy husband who covets other women (Envy) and the distrustful yet rich wife (Greed), a nymphomaniac brunette (Lust), a lazy blonde (Sloth), a holier-than-thou priest (Pride), a cranky old man (Wrath) and a hungry tour guide (Gluttony).

There isn’t much gore to speak of, but some of the ways the travelers are done away with are pretty amusing. The glutton of the group eats himself to death and chokes on poisoned wine (and the close-ups of him stuffing his greasy mouth are probably the most disturbing of the movie) while a greedy woman drowns in a mound of gold. Other kill scenes make little sense and don’t seem to tie into the specific person’s sin (like the Sloth woman dying from snakebite while she sleeps). Still, the scenes of the succubus stalking her prey, with her sunken cheekbones and ghoulish makeup, are always entertaining.

I also enjoyed the Baron’s creepy gothic castle that looked like it was transplanted straight from Transylvania. With its intricate stonework, gaudy Baroque furnishings and rich red drapes, Dracula would have felt right at home! Of course, Satan’s succubus considered it pretty comfy as well.

My only complaints were that the film drags a bit too much in certain parts, especially during some drawn-out lesbian scenes that go on for way too long. Maybe certain guys will enjoy them, but the soft-focus, girl-on-girl action did nothing for me, especially with the ridiculous paisley decorating scheme and the horrible ‘70s music lurking in the background. I also wished that some of the deaths tied more into each traveler’s particular sin instead of running out of ideas halfway through the film and having them die in seemingly random ways.

Though The Devil’s Nightmare certainly has its faults, I was still surprised by the entertainment value it offered. This film isn’t for everyone, but those that appreciate classic Euro-horror will most likely get a kick out of it. If you haven’t seen it, it at least deserves one viewing! It would be a sin not to see it!

Order it on Amazon!

The Brotherhood of Satan (1971)

In this little-seen and underrated Satanic flick, elderly residents of a isolated town have taken to snatching children and turning them into followers of Satan. Once they’ve collected enough children, a ritual will be held to transpose the senior citizens souls into the bodies of the kids, giving them renewed life!

Meanwhile, Ben (Charles Bateman), his girlfriend Nicky (Ahna Capri) and his daughter K.T. (Geri Reischl) are on their way to grandmother’s house when they happen upon a horrible accident and drive to the nearest town for help. Unfortunately, it’s the same Satanic town mentioned above and there they are met with hysterical townsfolk. They drive away, but car trouble forces them back into town. Once back in, a supernatural force keeps them and the rest of the townsfolk trapped. Seems that the senior citizen Satanists need one more child to perform their Black Mass, and that child is K.T. Will Ben save his daughter and the town before it’s too late and the small fry of Satan are unleashed?

The Brotherhood of Satan certainly has a convoluted and confusing way of unfolding its narrative, but as the pieces come together you are drawn further and further into the story. Besides its weird narrative structure, the film also boasts some odd scenes including a toy tank turning into a real tank and crushing a car and a dancing doll that causes the death of some parents, among others. The real highlight of the film for me was the Satan-worshipping party the seniors had. It was just like a potluck, except upon entry each person pledged their allegiance to Satan and one of their own was tried for allowing her grandson to be baptized. When she was deemed guilty, the ferocity and rage her brethren had towards her was truly frightening. There are also clever ideas used throughout the movie, including children’s toys as the instruments of murder (I don’t want to speak too much on this lest I give anything away, but toys come to (larger than) life to exact murder on parents).

Though the film is very PG-ish and lacks much blood and/or gore, the use of weird camera angles, an evocative score, creepy kids, the colorful visuals and the disorienting narrative really help give it a nightmarish, disturbing quality. Director Bernard McEveety and writers L.Q. Jones (who also stars as the town’s sheriff), Sean MacGregor and William Welch did an excellent job with the film, and I can’t understand why it hasn’t gotten more recognition over the years. It certainly isn’t perfect (especially with the confusing narrative structure), but it certainly deserves another look from horror fans.

If you are looking for a quirky ‘70s Satanic movie, The Brotherhood of Satan is one that should not be overlooked. With shades of Rosemary’s Baby and Race with the Devil, it really deserves a bigger audience!

Order it on Amazon!

The Cat O' Nine Tails (1971)

Few who read this site need an introduction to maestro Dario Argento, the Italian writer/director who is famous for his distinctive style and crafting some of the finest giallo films ever committed to celluloid, such as Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Deep Red, Suspira and so on. Some people love his films while others hate them, but neither can deny the impact Argento has made on the film scene. Though The Cat O’ Nine Tails (Il Gatto a Nove Code) may be considered by some as one of Argento’s “lesser” works, I believe that it is one of Argento’s most straightforward and easily accessible films…but still boasts Argento’s signature style.

The film tells the tale of blind Franco Arno (Karl Malden), who one night walking with his young niece Lori (Cinzia De Carolis) hears two men arguing. Arno asks Lori to describe the men as one of them is speaking about blackmail. The next morning, it is discovered that someone has broken into the Terzi Institute, which is researching criminal behavior as it correlates to genetics, and espionage is suspected, though it appears nothing was taken. However, the man that Arno overheard talking soon turns up dead and Arno seeks the help of journalist Carlo Giordani (James Franciscus) to solve the case. Meanwhile, more people connected to the Terzi Institute start turning up dead. Can Arno and Giordani find out who the killer is…before they are next?

Many people don’t appreciate The Cat O’ Nine Tails, and while it doesn’t have the same flashy style of other Argento movies, I still believe it is a fine film. Its storyline is much more linear than most of Argento’s films and even people that gripe that his films are “style over substance” can enjoy the straightforward whodunit story of The Cat O’ Nine Tails.

Despite the more subtle nature of this film, it certainly isn’t without the usual Argento pizzazz. There are lots of intriguing camera angles and lots of fluid camera movement. It even features the killer POV and extreme close ups of the killer’s eye that are used in other Argento films. Though it lacks the vivid colors of some of Argento’s other films, there are plenty of weird camera angles, constant movement and beautiful shots to keep the viewer engaged…and there is never any doubt that you are watching an Argento film.

The acting in the film is excellent, from Karl Malden as the blind Arno to James Franciscus as the journalist Giordani and even Cinzia De Carolis as the young Lori. Even the dubbing didn’t ruin the fine performances! The actors all made us believe in them, even when it was revealed that one of the leads may be the killer in a chilling and tense cemetery sequence.

There isn’t much blood in the film, as the killer prefers strangulation, but this didn’t dampen the experience at all for me. There is one jarring sequence in which a victim is pushed in front of a train and his body tumbles as the train’s brakes screech, but this is the most disturbing the film gets. Despite the lack of gore, the scenes in which the killer is stalking his or her intended victim are tense and the attacks are sudden. It is also interesting to note that most of the victims are male, quite a rarity in most giallo films, which was refreshing to see.

Speaking of rarities, there is also a subtext of homosexuality running throughout the narrative…not something you see everyday in a ‘70s giallo. Yet, it also speaks to Argento’s style and his boldness to cover “taboo” (at least back then) subjects.

Also of note is Ennio Morricone’s jazzy score, evocative of the times and Rome locale. It added enough punch to the proceedings and was quite effective during exciting sequences, particularly a high speed car chase and the thrilling scenes leading up to the finale.

My only complaint was the “reveal” of the bland killer. There are plenty of red herrings throughout the film and you probably can’t guess who it is just because of the numerous suspects, but even so the surprise is a bit disappointing and the ending a bit lackluster compared to other Argento films.

All in all, though, The Cat O’ Nine Tails is another excellent Argento films that shouldn’t be ignored or even considered as being inferior to his other works. It might be without his typical over the top flair and a bit more “mainstream”, but it still delivers a taut storyline that will keep you guessing to the end. Check out this underrated and under-watched Argento movie!

Order it on Amazon!

Long Weekend (1978)

Earlier this year I watched the disappointing Nature’s Grave, which I found out was actually a remake of the 1978 Australian film Long Weekend. As I dug a little deeper I discovered that many people held Long Weekend in high regard and it had been called one of the greatest nature-run-amuck films ever made. So after watching the unremarkable remake, which was supposedly shot-for-shot of the original, I felt it was only fair to go back to the source and watch Long Weekend.

Long Weekend isn’t your standard nature’s revenge flick – it is far more subtle, and is more of a psychological struggle between a bickering city couple and the unfamiliar outdoors they’ve chosen as a vacation spot. Some could argue that there is a supernatural element to the proceedings, but everything that happens also has a perfectly logical, natural explanation as well…it just seems supernatural because the city slickers aren’t familiar with nature and definitely don’t respect it.

Before I get ahead of myself, let me give a brief synopsis of Long Weekend:

Peter (John Hargreaves) and Marcia (Briony Behets) are a married couple who are obviously having some issues. To hopefully patch up their marriage they head out to a deserted beach for a long weekend. Peter brings his dog, Cricket, and his trusty rifle to shoot at random stuff as he drinks beer, leaving a trail of litter in his wake. Marcia does nothing but complain that they are far away from her friends and how she would much rather spend a nice weekend at a luxury hotel, all the while burning a hole in the ozone layer as she constantly hoses down the campsite with bug spray. The couple continues to have a flippant disregard for the environment – Marcia flicks cigarette butts everywhere, Peter throws beer bottles into the brush and kills innocent animals (he runs over a kangaroo, kills a mama duck with an errant bullet and shoots a sea cow repeatedly). Soon, the laws of nature come into play and Peter and Marcia face the harsh justice of the jungle.

Long Weekend is a gorgeous film, with wide panning shots of the crystal-clear surf and white sand beach. The pristine environment makes the destruction Peter and Marcia cause that much more ugly and harsh. It’s a very sharp contrast between the food wrappers, cigarette butts, bottles of beer and the once pure coastline. Yet, in the finale when Peter stumbles upon another abandoned campsite we see how humans may come and go but Mother Nature seems to bounce back from any blight humans mar her with. Director Colin Eggleston definitely crafted a socially conscious and stunning film that was way ahead of its time.

As for the story, writer Everett De Roche really involves the audience in his cautionary tale. As mentioned earlier, it has a bit of a supernatural feel to it, but you could also look at it from a very rational point of view as well. It’s all in how you perceive the film, and I like how De Roche left it ambiguous for the audience. I also like how the characters were so unlikable, yet you were still interested to see what would happen to them and even a bit concerned for their safety (even though they brought their misfortune on themselves). All their trouble basically stemmed from poor decisions they made and their unfamiliarity with the outdoors. I mean, who really steals an eagle egg, smashes it and doesn’t expect the bird to come after them or approaches a possum and doesn’t expect to get bitten? Though the two leads make poor decisions, there is a part of you wishing they get out alive and perhaps learn a lesson not to mess with nature. Kudos to De Roche for making us care about such unlikable characters.

Both Briony Behets and John Hargreaves must also be commended for their strong performances in Long Weekend. They are basically the only two characters in the film, plus they are rotten individuals (she is always nagging while he is just an asshole, plus they have their own nasty secrets that come out as the film progresses), and yet we cannot take our eyes away from them. I think the biggest problem with the remake, Nature’s Grave, was the acting. In the remake the two leads didn’t have the fiery chemistry that Behets and Hargreaves possess, nor did they play it as realistically. Hargreaves and Behets really sell the characters and really involve us in the story, making us want to see and learn more about their vile characters.

There is also a lot to discover within the story itself, as the secrets of the secluded beach reveal themselves. The film is slow-paced, but that doesn’t make it bad by any means! Instead, it spends time building the tension and is punctuated by several shocking scenes (Peter’s crossbow accidentally going off and almost hitting Marcia, an aerial attack by an eagle, a menacing shape in the water while Peter is out swimming, Peter’s exploration of an overgrown campsite, and so on). The atmosphere of slowly-building dread is nicely accompanied by a beautiful score that helps accentuate the eeriness and tension of the film.

If you happen to come across Nature’s Grave, I recommend skipping it and renting the far superior original, Long Weekend. Though this is not your typical “animals-run-amuck” revenge film, it is still a breathtaking and tension-filled film that deserves to be seen by those that like their slowly-creeping horror!

Order it on Amazon!

The Manitou (1978)

We all bitch and moan about the state of horror and the death of originality in Hollywood, but looking back on older flicks perhaps they had a bit too much creativity! Take, for example, the zany 1978 film The Manitou, which features, among other things, a midget medicine man, ghostly lizards (well, actually, someone dressed in a lizard costume), Tony Curtis dressed as a psychic, a levitating granny, Native American demons that look like a giant eye and lots of colorful, bright lasers!

The film starts with Karen (Susan Strasberg) visiting her doctor after discovering a fast-growing tumor on her neck. The doctors aren’t sure what to make of it, but it definitely looks like a fetus, so they schedule her for surgery. Concerned that the doctors aren’t telling her everything, Karen contacts her old flame Harry (Tony Curtis) for help. Harry is a psychic who scams little old ladies out of their money, one of the reasons why Karen left him. Nonetheless, Harry agrees to stand by her as she goes through the surgery…only it doesn’t go as planned. The doctors are unable to remove the growth because their scalpels are turned against them. Karen is moved to another room and monitored and Harry contacts some his psychic friends to hold a séance and find out if an evil spirit is behind Karen’s affliction. It turns out the evil spirit is none other than Misquamacas, a 400-year-old medicine man who plans on raising hell as soon as he’s reborn.

Harry visits an old professor (Burgess Meredith), who wrote something in a book about reincarnated medicine men, and he suggests that Harry hunt down his own medicine man to “fight fire with fire”. Harry tracks down John Singing Rock (Michael Ansara), who agrees to help him fight the evil medicine man.
When Misquamacas finally “hatches” from Karen, the real showdown begins…can Singing Rock and Harry save Karen and the world before it’s too late?

The Manitou is one crazy, over-the-top flick! The first half of the film starts off pretty solidly (who doesn’t love to watch Tony Curtis prance around pretending to be a psychic or watch a little old granny become possessed, speak in a Native American language and levitate before being tossed down a flight of stairs?) but the last half of the film, where the midget-sized medicine man is born, just devolves into pure schlock. I seriously question how any of the actors could take their roles so seriously when there were rogue lasers and ghostly lizards to deal with. How many takes did it take for them to act with a straight face?

The director behind the film, William Girdler (who also co-wrote the film), is behind such schlocky fare like Grizzly and Day of the Animals, but The Manitou is beyond bizarre. It takes a special kind of horror fan to really appreciate this odd and “out there” horror flick, but purveyors of the peculiar will no doubt enjoy The Manitou for its sheer strangeness.

Buy it on Amazon!

Beyond the Door (1974)

Feeling very much like a mix of Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist, Beyond the Door (aka Chi Sei? and The Devil Within Her) tells the story of Jessica Barrett (Juliet Mills), a seemingly happy ‘70s housewife with two bratty, potty-mouthed kids and husband Robert (Gabriele Lavia) who is a successful music producer. Things take a turn for the worse when Jessica discovers she is pregnant. When Robert finds her in the bathroom puking up blood, Jessica swears that the baby is trying to kill her. She begins hearing strange, guttural voices and laughter and acting strangely. Upon visiting the doctor, she is shocked to find out that the fetus is developing at an accelerated rate. There is also a strange man named Dimitri (Richard Johnson) hanging around, who is either intends to help or harm Jessica. It all comes to a head when Jessica becomes possessed by the devil inside of her, spewing bile and threats to all around her. Can she be helped or will she give birth to the damned thing inside of her?

Beyond the Door is a great Satanic possession film form 1974. It probably isn’t a must-see for all horror fans, but those that enjoy films in this particular sub-genre should definitely give it a look. Though it sometimes has an unintentionally funny feel to it, it has a great atmosphere, a few nice scares and enough gross-out puke to give The Exorcist a run for its money!

Beyond the Door came out just a year after The Exorcist, and though it is similar I wouldn’t call it a direct rip-off. Though, like Regan in The Exorcist, Jessica takes on a whole new, unflattering look, spews a lot of groddy greenish-brown puke and turns her head all the way around, the similarities don’t make the film any less engrossing. The film also shares some close similarities with Rosemary’s Baby, like when Jessica eats a rotten banana peel off the street just like Rosemary eats raw meat in Rosemary’s Baby. Even though Beyond the Door has been called a “rip-off” of earlier horror flicks, I still found it to be an enjoyable film and worth seeing.

One thing that makes it such a treat is the crazy kid characters. The little boy, Ken (David Colin Jr.) loves to say curse words and his older sister, Gail (Barbara Fiorini), loves to talk like a hep cat and has fifteen copies of the same book she always lugs around with her. I’m not really sure what the point of making these kids so weird was, but it sure kept me entertained!! The characters of the parents, Jessica and Robert, were a little more normal, but they certainly didn’t act like normal parents!

Besides the quirky characters, the narrative of the story flowed pretty normally. I loved how it opened upon this candlelit church with an eerie voiceover of the “star” of the story! Though there were some plot holes and things that were never quite tied up, overall I enjoyed the story the film presented. The story was engaging, the characters were unique, the situation was scary and the location was visually arresting.

Speaking of locations, Beyond the Door’s location of sunny San Francisco, with additional scenes filmed in Italy, gave the film a beautiful, dreamlike quality that juxtaposed well with the horror later in the film. The protagonists’ apartment and surroundings are all beautiful…but things start to take a sinister turn as Jessica becomes possessed by the devil inside her. The children’s toys take on a sinister look, cupboards slam on their own, plates are hurled against the walls before breaking into hundreds of pieces and Jessica herself becomes menacing as the demon takes over her body. The contrast between the airy apartment before the possession and the dark, isolated apartment it becomes during the possession really heightens the tension and illustrates the dramatic change Jessica has gone through.

Beyond the Door is a forgotten possession film that really should be seen by fans of the sub-genre. Though it obviously “borrowed” heavily from The Exorcist and Rosemary’s Baby, it is still a pretty good film that deserves to be seen!

Buy it on Amazon!

Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)

Some movies have a reputation that precedes them, a reputation that has marked them as being “bad” movies. Most everyone you talk to about these movies tells you they are awful…The Exorcist II: The Heretic is one such movie that is loathed by most horror fans and critics (oftentimes called “the worst sequel ever made”), but I was curious to see if it was really as horrible as everyone claimed.

The verdict?

Yes, it is as bad as everyone claims!

It cinches its title as one of the worst sequels ever made with a ridiculously unbelievable script, horrible dialogue, bad acting and taking itself way too seriously. The result is a self-important but tiresomely dull movie.

Four years after a demon was exorcised from Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair), Father Lamont (Richard Burton) is put to task by the Catholic Church to get to the bottom of Father Merrin’s (Max von Sydow) death during the exorcism.

Meanwhile, Regan has grown into a chipper chubby-cheeked teen with no recollection of the exorcism, or at least that is what she claims. Her psychologist, Dr. Gene Tuskin (Louise Fletcher, who looks uncannily like Ellen Burstyn), thinks those memories are locked deep within her and wants to get to them. She introduces Regan to synchronized hypnosis (a process that involves little more than a tabletop machine with flashing lights that’s connected to electrodes), which will allow her to see into Regan’s subconscious (gee, sounds like a whole lotta unbelievable crap to me!).

Father Lamont comes to visit Regan and gets put in “synch” with her mind. He can see what happened that night and that the demon Pazuzu is still dwelling inside Regan. He then travels to Africa to hunt down Kokumo (James Earl Jones), the only known survivor (besides Regan) of an exorcism at the holy hands of Father Merrin. Add mumbo-jumbo about “good” and “bad” locusts, psychic connections that span continents and a big locust explosion at the finale and you’ve got an idea about the absurdity of the plot.

It’s sad, really, because director John Boorman, who wanted to create something wholly different than the first Exorcist, succeeded, but at the horrible cost of making a pompous, meandering and boring film. Visually, the film has its moments, with eye-catching aerial shots of red, rocky cliffs, plains and fields in Africa and the swarms of locusts, but those small moments do little to alleviate the pain of watching the remaining 95% of the movie.

The acting is cringe-worthy, with Linda Blair coming off as horribly annoying and the other actors faring no better. Of course, the source material, written by William Goodhart, could be the root of all the trouble. The dialogue (“When the wings have brushed you… is there no hope once the wings have brushed you?”) is atrocious and the situations and circumstances are just ludicrous. Not even the score, by the great Ennio Morricone (whom I usually love), is any good. It’s tribal sounds and demon-screeching just serve to grate nerves, very much like the rest of the movie.

This film had a grand scope when it first started, setting out to investigate exorcisms the world over from Africa to South America and beyond, but somehow its grand story became muddled and bogged down, both from the mythology laid down by the first film but also from its own preposterous storyline that became weighted with far too many questions it sought to answer. Between Father Lamont’s visits to the tribes in Africa and his “synching” with Regan’s mind, things become pretty unbelievable pretty quickly. And don’t get me started on the dream sequences!

Years of warnings from viewers and critics alike didn’t deter me from seeing this stink-bomb of a film, but hopefully it will save you the trouble. Unless, of course, you’re masochistic and enjoy being put through pain…then, by all means I would highly recommend Exorcist II: The Heretic!

Available from Amazon!

The Grapes of Death (1978)

After being introduced to Jean Rollins’ work through the film The Iron Rose, I decided to take a look at a few other of his films. I decided to start his 1978 film The Grapes of Death (aka Les Raisins de la Mort)as the premise, location and promise of gore lured me. The film was said to feature zombies, be set in the vineyards of France and be one of Rollins’ most ooey and gooey horror films.

I didn’t see any zombies or French vineyards, but the gore certainly was present and accounted for!

The film opens with a group of vineyard workers spraying down the rows and rows of sickly grapes with harsh pesticides. Despite the fact that they are all wearing “protective masks” (which are little more than painter’s masks) one man falls violently ill. Meanwhile, a young woman named Elizabeth (Marie-Georges Pascal) is on her way into the region via train. She is going to meet her fiancée at the winery where he works. The same man that fell ill in the vineyards boards her train, kills her friend and attacks her, all the while a large, oozing wound on his face is rapidly spreading.

Elizabeth hightails it into the French countryside, but encounters more people with the same pus-filled sores that try to attack her and anyone else who remains unaffected. The infected are not only violent, but they are also organized and sneaky. Can Elizabeth make her way to her fiancées winery and get help…before it’s too late?

This movie was pretty hit and miss with me. It was touted as a zombie flick, but I think that is a grossly inaccurate description. It wasn’t clear if the infected died and came back as pus-filled atrocities or if they were just sick. Besides stumbling around a little bit, they certainly didn’t act like zombies either, as they could speak and manipulate people. I was also expecting a bit more violence or action, but the movie dragged in many places. I’d say the bulk of the movie featured the heroine running, climbing and walking through the rocky French countryside (no vineyards in sight!).

The best part of the film was the special FX done on the afflicted. The greenish-yellow pus, the raw red sores and the bright red dripping blood reminded me of the over-the-top effects used in Street Trash or Slime City. While The Grapes of Death didn’t use the extreme bright color palate of either of those films, the effect of being grossed out was still achieved!

The signature Jean Rollins style of filming is definitely apparent in The Grapes of Death. The slow, languid shots give the film a dream-like quality, while the small flourishes of close-ups (of eyes, faces, etc.) are evident throughout the film. Visually, the color palate of the film is rather dull, making the colorful seeping sores on the infected pop all that much more.

The story is pretty straightforward and simple, but the ending is pretty powerful and even a bit surprising. I also loved the scenes with the woman in white, who absolutely stole the show!

The Grapes of Death isn’t a film I would recommend everyone see, but for those interested in Jean Rollins filmmaking it is a must-see. As many before me have said, the gore is phenomenal and fun and it pretty much makes an otherwise drawn out movie very enjoyable.

The Grapes of Death pairs excellently with a nice bottle of French Chianti.

Available from Amazon!

The Iron Rose (1973)

Though the French filmmaker Jean Rollin might be known to the casual cinephile more for his erotic vampire films, his little-known 1973 film The Iron Rose (La Rose de Fer) is instead a very surreal, macabre and poetic film that addresses Rollins’ penchant for darkly introspective films. The Iron Rose definitely appealed to my gothic sensibilities, but its slow pace and focus on visuals instead of plot it won’t appeal to everyone.

A young couple decides to explore an old cemetery after a long day of bicycling through the French countryside. The two just met at a wedding reception the night before but waste no time in descending into a crypt for some hanky-panky. When the come up for air, they realize that night has fallen. In the dark, the cemetery becomes a very foreboding place and the two quickly search out the gates to get out. The thing is, they just can’t find them! As the night continues, the two keep searching for a way out; all the while the woman becomes more and more comfortable with being with the dead in the cemetery.

With its setting in a ramshackle and romantic (ok, most would call it creepy) cemetery, The Iron Rose is requisite viewing for those that revel in the darker and more macabre side of life. Its gothic atmosphere (wildly overgrown cemetery, crumbling architecture) and striking visuals (the opening scene of a woman in red standing at the edge of a roaring sea, the eerie shots of the cemetery) are a tribute to Rollins’ talent as a filmmaker and are the reason why the film succeeds.

The film has little dialogue and not much of a story (“lovers get stuck in a cemetery at night, get spooked, go a little batty” just about covers it), instead relying upon atmosphere, ambiance and emotion to draw the audience in (of course, beautiful actress Francoise Pascal probably doesn’t hurt either). The film is bathed in gothic atmosphere and aches with angst. There are no spooks, no psychos and no monsters stalking the young couple…just the hundreds of dead surrounding them, reminding them of their own mortality.

On the down side, the film is slowly (but deliberately!) paced with not much happening. The couple runs around a lot, knocks over a few headstones, gets into a violent fight, makes love in an open grave filled with bones and the woman begins reciting some darkly themed poetry and philosophy. If you are looking for a straightforward, gory horror film, The Iron Rose isn’t for you. The thing is, though, the slightly repetitive nature of the film works in its favor. We, like the protagonists, feel like we are trapped in a surreal nightmare that we just can’t escape. For some of us, including the female protagonist, this dark atmosphere is beguiling, bewitching and we don’t want to leave it.

More of an art film than a horror movie, The Iron Rose is nonetheless a beautifully enchanting piece of work that deserves to be more widely seen. It also shows what a lyrically visual filmmaker Rollins’ was and continued to be throughout his career.

If you are in the mood for an artistically gothic film, no other rose would smell as sweet as The Iron Rose.

Available from Amazon!

The Red Queen Kills Seven Times (1972)

There might be those that grow weary of the routine plot of gialli films. They usually rely on similar circumstances, plot twists, glamorous characters and black-gloved killers. If you are a fan of giallo, though, you just can’t get enough of ‘em! There is just something about their sophisticated style, vivid visuals, gory death scenes and elaborate who-done-its to keep you hooked!

In 1972’s The Red Queen Kills Seven Times, director Emilio Miraglia never strays far from the giallo formula, but still manages to create a tension-filled film with candy-colored set-pieces, an impressive cast and sufficient plot twists to keep you guessing!

In the wealthy Wildenbruck family, an old legend says that every hundred years two sisters, the Red Queen and the Black Queen, will violently quarrel. The Black Queen will kill the Red Queen, but a year later the Red Queen will return for revenge, killing six people before finally killing her sister, the Black Queen. Sisters Kitty (Barbara Bouchet) and Evelyn Wildenbruck never really got along in childhood and as grownups have drifted apart. Kitty is a fashion photographer working for a fashion house and still visits her family’s castle where she and Evelyn were raised by their grandfather. Evelyn hasn’t been heard from for some time, but it’s assumed she’s living in America, where she moved to one year prior.

One night, their grandfather has a heart attack after a fright and the Red Queen, wearing a flowing red cape and cackling loudly, is seen near the castle. When the grandfather’s will is read, it is discovered that no one can touch it until the following year. Did the grandfather know something about the 100 year curse that his heirs don’t?

Soon after, murders begin occurring. It seems as if people from the fashion house where Kitty works are being targeting. After the general manager is killed, the police come up with a sketch of the murderer from an eyewitness. Kitty recognizes the face as the face of her own sister Evelyn! Problem is, she killed Evelyn a year ago.

Has the prophecy about the Red Queen come true or is someone else to blame for the murders? Could it be Kitty’s lover, vying for the general manager position, top model Lulu seeking revenge, drug-addict Peter seeking money or is Evelyn really back from the grave?

Red Queen’s luscious visuals and lurid color palettes make for a sensational viewing experience. Rather than bathing entire shots in bright hues of red and blue (think Argento’s Suspiria), each object – a bright yellow car, a blood-red cape, a cool blue and green apartment – pops out at you. The colorful 70s fashions also help bring a real liveliness to the film – plaid polyester suits, batiks, bold cuts and colors contribute to the sense of excitement. The settings – the Wildenbruck’s opulent castle, the fashion house’s posh office and the characters luxurious apartments, for example – all seem larger than life as well! These visuals grab your attention and help pull you into the story.

Giallo fans know the story is usually the weakest point in the film (gialli usually rely more on visuals than a cohesive storyline), yet Red Queen did a fine job of working all its kinks out. It also hid its secrets pretty well, with the villain never being obvious until close to the end. Except for a few rough patches (unnecessary rape scene, I’m looking at you!) the story flowed smoothly and made sense.

The acting was also done extremely well. Barbara Bouchet was fantastic as Kitty Wildenbruck. She was both an independent woman, yet vulnerable at the same time. As she begins to unravel, you can’t help but feel sympathetic towards her. Even though she was behind Evelyn’s demise (or was she?) it is very easy to feel sorry for her when everyone around her starts dying and she’s forced to face her demons. The rest of the cast is equally impressive. All the ladies in the film are absolutely gorgeous and include the previously mentioned Barbara Bouchet as well as Marina Malfatti, Maria Pia Giancaro and Sybil Danning. Unfortunately for us girls, the men aren’t as attractive as the women, but nonetheless they put on a good show.

The Red Queen Kills Seven Times isn’t as gory as some other gialli, but it does deliver. Make sure not to miss the scene where an escaping mental patient is purposely impaled on an iron fence or the death by VW Bug. Just like the rest of the film’s visuals, the blood is brightly garish!

Gialli often follow the same formula – a deep, dark secret is revealed which unleashes a black-gloved killer, usually in a posh clique, and everyone is a suspect. Still, despite the formula that most seem to follow, they can still be incredibly entertaining. The Red Queen Kills Seven Times is no different and is a sophisticated, sexy, stylish and sinister romp into the world of giallo.

Available from Amazon!

The House That Dripped Blood (1971)

Come with me, darlings, back to a time when the British horror house Amicus ruled the Cineplex, back to a time where horror movies gave us the pleasantly unpleasant sensation of goosebumps instead of just simply grossing us out with gores. Come, travel back with me to a time of misty moors, of strange noises in the night, of unnamable things in the dark, and even more terrifying still, the evil things that lurked beneath your own eaves.

Come and witness the terror of…The House That Dripped Blood!

After renting an old house out in the English countryside while shooting his new vampire movie, a famous film star (John Pertwee) goes missing. Scotland Yard sends a detective (John Bennett) to investigate and a local police officer (John Malcolm) recounts the sordid past of the house…that dripped blood!

This 1971 film is a must for anyone wanting to relive or experience for the first time the glory days of Amicus Productions. First of all, it’s one of the most well-done horror film anthologies out there, boasting stories by Psycho scribe Robert Bloch and an impressive cast featuring Christopher Lee, Ingrid Pitt, Peter Cushing and many others!

The first segment, entitled “Method for Murder,” stars Denholm Elliot as horror author that buys the house with his wife (Joanna Dunham) so he can focus on writing his next book. Inspiration comes soon enough, and he creates a vicious strangler named Dominic. Trouble is, he keeps seeing him everywhere he goes! Is the author crazy or is Dominic really there? This is a superb, paranoid piece of cinema that really makes you wonder if Dominic (played by Tom Adams) is really there or not. There is a great tension both in the story and how the segment is shot by director Peter Duffell. I also loved that Elliot made his role of the author so believable!

“Waxworks” is the title of the next segment and it features Peter Cushing as a wealthy, retired gentleman that buys the accursed house. One day while in town he visits a wax museum and is startled by a wax mannequin that looks very much like a woman from his past. When his friend (Joss Ackland) shows up, he too visits the wax museum and is transfixed by the same beautiful wax model. We never quite find out who the mystery girl from both their pasts is, but we are treated to a very unnerving and creepy atmosphere. There is a disorienting dream sequence that is disturbing and of course the finale is very well executed.

Christopher Lee stars in segment three, “Sweets for the Sweet,” as a seemingly cruel father who forbids his young daughter from playing with other children and even from having a doll. Her nanny is shocked at his behavior, but soon learns a horrifying family secret that explains everything. Christopher Lee’s character is downright nasty in this one (always a pleasure to see) while the cute-as-a-button Chloe Franks plays his daughter. I loved the interaction between the two, as well as the nanny’s (Nyree Dawn Porter) interaction with the both of them. I felt the story was a bit more predictable than the last two, but wholly enjoyable nonetheless.

The final macabre tale called “The Cloak” brings the film full circle as we return to the detective (John Bennett) who is investigating the latest foul play to befall an owner of the house. The detective leaves the police station to interview the realtor (John Bryans) who sold the famous actor (John Pertwee) the house. The realtor recounts how the actor acquired the house to be close to the set of his latest movie, a vampire film. The actor was dissatisfied with the low-budget props and costumes for the film, so when he stumbled upon an old curio shop that had the perfect cloak for his role, he spared nothing to acquire it. He didn’t have to spare much, as the old proprietor was more than happy to sell him the cloak. There do seem to be some problems, though. Each time the actor dons the cloak he can no longer see himself in a mirror and has a thirst for blood. You see, the cloak turns him into a real vampire whenever he wears it!

Of course the detective doesn’t believe a lick of the story (or any of the others, I imagine) and goes to investigate the house on his own…

The final segment does a great job of tying everything up into a neat and complete package. I loved how the wrapped the whole story up with the overarching storyline of the detective investigating the film star’s disappearance. I also enjoyed Pertwee’s performance of the “prima donna” actor. Ingrid Pitt was equally good as a fellow actress who takes a special liking to the cloak.

Overall, The House That Dripped Blood is an excellent horror anthology. It doesn’t rely on gore or gags to entertain the viewer, but rather on building tension and slowly unveiling the mysteries of the stories. Instead of showing you all its cards at once, it holds back and makes you question exactly what it’s holding. It makes you wonder, it makes you think and it makes you a little spooked…what more can you ask for?

They certainly don’t make many movies like this anymore, and it is a pity. Luckily we have these old gems to look back on and enjoy. If you haven’t been privy to The House That Dripped Blood, I highly recommend you check it out!

Available from Amazon!

Who Can Kill a Child? (1976)

It is usually very taboo for a film, any film, to show children getting killed. The daring Who Can Kill A Child? decided to break that taboo and prominently features children getting shot and beaten to death. It also shows real footage of suffering children during the horrors of the Holocaust, the Vietnam War, the Korean War and many African civil wars. There is very graphic footage of starving, wounded, dying and dead children that is sad and shocking to see.

The film aspires to show us how children are usually the ones that suffer most during famine, war, natural and man-made disasters. Why shouldn’t children turn on the very people that are supposed to protect them but fail to do so? What would happen if children banded together to stand up against adults and fought back against the many years of cruelty and neglect? Could you really kill a child if you had to, if it meant the little tyke’s life or yours?

An English couple is taking a vacation in Spain. The woman is pregnant and wants some peace and relaxation, so her husband suggests the island of Almanzora, which he has fond memories of. The two set off by themselves in a small powerboat for the island, but when they arrive, it’s not as the husband remembered it. It is utterly devoid of grown-ups, though there are plenty of children frolicking around. Assuming that there is a big fiesta on the other side of the island, the two stay and wait for the grown-ups to come back. Except that there is no one left alive on the island except for the children, who’ve gone mad and murdered all the adults. Can the couple save themselves or will they be forced to kill a child (or two or three) to survive?

Who Can Kill a Child? is a fantastic film made in 1976 and it has recently been released on DVD for the first time by the wonderful Dark Sky Films. With its disturbingly shocking story and beautiful direction by Narciso Ibanez Serrador (who also penned the script from a novel by Juan Jose Plans called “El Juego”) the film works wonderfully. The setting of the Spanish isle of Almanzora is gorgeous. The bright, white Mediterranean-style village, bright blue skies and sparkling waters create a contrasting backdrop to the horrors that unfold on-screen. It’s also interesting to note that most of the killings occur in broad daylight, with the hot sun relentlessly beating down on the victims. Not many films that are set during the day can pull off a creepy vibe, but in Who Can Kill a Child? it works like a charm, making events even more uncomfortable because they occur right out in the open.

Another aspect that makes the film work so effectively is the acting. All of the children (and there are A LOT of them) are wonderful in the film. Every single one of them oozes hatred out of their dark and stormy eyes; just one look and we know they mean business. The acting is so realistic that it’s chilling! Perhaps one of the most effective scenes involves a wife of a fisherman who lives on the other side of Almanzora with her children and their grandmother. Two children from the village “infect” the wife’s children with their pure hatred, and as the woman calls them into dinner, they silently defy her. As we see her perplexed expression, we also see all of the children in the village ominously emerge from the cliffs above her home.

The film does have its faults, most noticeably in believability. After the couple witnesses a little girl who kills an old man by beating him with his own cane and children using a dead body as a piñata, it may seem wise to get the heck off the island! But do they leave? No, they opt to stick around to rescue a Dutch teenager who is hiding out somewhere on the island and keeps tracking them down with phone calls. Another quibble is with the color of the blood, which looks almost orange in color! If you are going to prominently feature children getting killed in your film, at least make it realistic! The “blood” that was used looked more like thick orange-ish paint that was splashed and dribbled on the victims. Still, these are small problems compared to the remarkable story and taboo subject the film deals with.

Dark Sky Films have done a spectacular job with this release – the original 1:8.5.1 anamorphic widescreen has been restored and the picture looks absolutely stunning and clean. I usually don’t mention these technical aspects, but I felt that Dark Sky did such a great job with this film that they deserved mention. This film probably hasn’t looked this good since its original theatrical release!

Who Can Kill a Child? is a superb film that shouldn’t be missed. Its notorious scenes of child murder aren’t all that shocking nowadays, but they still pack a punch, especially when other films usually won’t touch the taboo subject.

Available on Amazon!

Death Race 2000 (1975)

In preparation for its upcoming remake, helmed by the Paul W.S. Anderson, I decided to finally get around to seeing Death Race 2000, the Roger Corman produced, Peter Bartel directed cult classic.

The film is set in the futuristic “United Provinces of America” where the most popular sport is the ultra-violent Death Race 2000, a cross-country car race where mowing over unsuspecting pedestrians is a quick way to rack up extra points. The five contestants include the fan favorite (and S&M-clad) Frankenstein (David Carradine), his #1 competition the macho Machine Gun Joe Viterbo (Sylvester Stallone), cowgirl Calamity Jane (Mary Woronov), Nazi Matilda the Hun (Roberta Collins) and conceited Nero the Hero (Martin Kove). All the racers also have a navigator riding alongside them, and Frankenstein’s new navigator, Annie Smith (Simone Griffeth), might be harboring a few secrets.

Meanwhile, the anti-race resistance will stop at nothing to see that the race is canceled…for good! They plan to overthrow Mr. President (Sandy McCallum) and cancel the extremely gratuitous and gory national sport, even if it means killing off the racers.

Will anyone be left ALIVE to cross the finish line in Death Race 2000?

I cannot believe I hadn’t seen this spectacularly entertaining B-movie until just recently! It just goes to show that even though you may think you’ve seen it all, something will always pop up to prove you wrong! Death Race 2000 was an absolute delight to watch. Sure it could be cheesy and lame in parts, but it was riotous nonetheless!

The film is a bombastic piece of trash cinema treasure, lewd and crude, large and in charge! While it is not as gory as I thought it would be, some of the special FX are particularly satisfying. Cars plow through pedestrians, smashing, smooshing, squishing and squashing any annoying body parts that get in the way. And, of course, who can forget the high-octane action of the actual car race? Yes, fiends, there are good times to be had watching this flick.

And of course you wouldn’t watch this for Oscar-worthy performances (you won’t find any here), but there are some very fun, recognizable faces that put on, ahem, memorable performances! Of course you’ve got Stallone here throwing his hissy man-fits, gunning down crowds and running over people with gusto as Machine Gun Joe, but the show truly belongs to David Carradine and his stoic, mysterious Frankenstein character. Of course, the woman drivers, Mary Woronov as Calamity Jane and Roberta Collins as Matilda the Hun, do a bang-up job and have their fair share of the fun as well.

The underlying message of rebellion against a big bad government was a little too Star Wars for me, but I think the simplistic and silly approach to the subject was what the film was going for in the first place, so I can’t really complain. The film was well-paced, and kept my attention throughout, except for maybe the love scenes, which I giggled through.

Fans of outrageous and over-the-top B-movies will definitely love this film…don’t wait for the remake, check this film out NOW!

Death Race 2000 is fast, furious and finishes first in my book.

Available on Amazon!