Chopping Mall (1986)

We're taking a trip firmly back to my youth today with Chopping Mall, a movie that used to get played A TON on one of my local channels circa 1991-92.  As such, it's got a lot of nostalgic value for me.  Back then, I thought it was cool to see robots roaming around killing people (including Murray Fudderman, no less).  Today, while it's not QUITE the classic that I remember, I still think it's a relatively fun way to waste 75 minutes. 

Useless background info: This flick was directed by Jim Wynorski, a guy who has a pretty decent cult following and a well-deserved reputation as a man who slathers on his cheese as thick as it can go.  Not to say that that's necessarily bad, but it's best to know what you're getting into when you see this dude's name in the credits.  It was also produced by Roger Corman, which acounts for the AFOREMENTIONED Murray Fudderman, a.k.a. Dick Miller, making one of his many appearances as a character named Walter Paisley. 

PLOT: You know how Dawn of the Dead was set in a shopping mall?  Well, so is Chopping Mall.  Clever, huh?  But instead of zombies, the villains in this film are three havoc-causing security robots, accidentally activated by an electrical storm and hellbent on eradicating a group of partying teens from the premises.  Yeah, it's not the deepest thing in the world, and the execution occasionally wanders into dopey territory.  But if you're watching a Jim Wynorski movie for Shakespeare, you're looking in the wrong place. 
PLOT RATING: ** out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTORS: Other than Miller, there's one name that I recognize - Russell Todd, best known to me as the would-be camp counselor attempting to get into Kirsten Baker's pants in Friday the 13th Part II.  I'm actually kinda surprised that this guy didn't make it bigger during the '80s, as he was both talented and handsome enough to rise way higher than the B-level shitfests he's primarily known for.  The characters themselves are your typical horror movie mixed bag, with nerds, jocks, pretty people and shy girls all represented, and none of them made me want to throw my remote at the screen, although none of them were particularly memorable.  Well, except for Suzee Slater, who (a) has gigantic breasts and (b) is the recipient of this death scene.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS RATING: ** 1/2 out of ****.

COOL FACTOR: A movie with a 77-minute running time has precious little time to waste, and this film wastes absolutely no time getting right to the meat portion of its story, as the characters play cat-and-mouse with the ultra mean battlebots.  The robots themselves are designed very well, rolling around on tank treads and talking in the requisite deep, scary voice, and are able to shoot tranquilizer darts, electrodes, and laserblasts at their quary.  It amounts to a couple admittedly coolly staged deaths and some sporadically tense chase sequences inside the mall.
COOL FACTOR: *** out of ****.

OVERALL: This is one of those movies that were a dime-a-dozen during the '80s.  Come up with a basic premise, throw a relatively attractive cast together, commence series of deaths, go.  Some of them were better than others, and Chopping Mall has managed to rise above the pack over the years and get a cult fanbase with its quirkiness and sense of humor.  It may not be quite as good as I remembered during my childhood, but it's still worth a watch if you've got a couple bucks and slightly over an hour to spare. 
OVERALL RATING: ** 1/2 out of ****.

Restoring Mount Rushmore

Ordinarily, this is where I post some long-winded introduction and give some background information on the movie that I'm about to review.  That's not the case this week, as, much like Chuck D, I got so much trouble on my mind.  Last Saturday, I rewatched the remakes of Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street on AMC Fearfest.  It was my first viewing of both since seeing them in theaters, and the thing that struck me like a lightning bolt was that I had never ONCE felt the urge to revisit either movie since that day. 

It doesn't stop there.  Going to all of the latest horror releases at the multiplex used to be practically a requirement for yours truly.  No matter the genre - ghost stories, found footage films, modern-day slashers, remakes - I would eat them up.  September and October, in particular, were circled on the calendar months in advance as the time when Hollywood unrolled its latest batch of big-time horror offerings to placate all of us Halloween-induced fanatics.  And it didn't feel like a job.  This is very noteworthy considering that Friday night is my designated "movie night," a move that resulted in a "20 hours without sleep" me struggling - and actually managing - to stay awake in a movie theater.

It's been a long, slow process, but I'm not the horror guru I used to be.  There was a time when I would regularly check out websites like Dread Central and Bloody Disgusting for the latest release dates, trailers, rumors etc., all with the express goal of getting the good, nasty details on upcoming horror movies with the end goal of being an informed theater viewer.  Those days, it seems, are long gone, and when I think about the timeframe that this attitudanal switch took place, I can pinpoint pretty accurately what it was.  So allow me to come back full circle from that first paragraph and say that I really miss the Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger of my youth.

Horror is a very vast genre consisting of many varied and defined subgenres.  If you like to be scared and you've got a decent stomach, odds are that pretty much ANYONE can find something in the horror genre that they will enjoy, from over-the-top splatterfests to realistic films about serial killers.  I don't think that many people would disagree, however, with the statement that the horror movie really has an unholy trinity of modern villains as its singular God.  There's the father (Michael), the son (Jason) and the unholy ghost (Freddy).  These three have come to define the scary flick for myself and two generations of horror fans, much like Dracula, Frankenstein and the Wolf Man defined it for past generations, and the fact that it has been more than three years since any of these three legendary characters have graced our theater screens is very troubling to me.

A very good online friend of mine once put what has happened to these horror icons in professional wrestling terminology.  If he's reading this, hopefully he doesn't mind me outright stealing his point - suffice to say, it's perfect.  All three of the AFOREMENTIONED characters have been recreated and reimagined in the past decade in remake form, and all three reimaginings (while varying in quality) have one similar characteristic.  Instead of simply updating the familiar story for today with modern characters but similar styles and execution, these films have devalued their aces in the hole with stylistic shifts, changes just for the sake of change, and some truly head-scratching creative decisions.  Here's where the wrestling metaphor comes in.  Watching these films is like watching a wrestling company take its main event stars and continually job them out and/or put them in wacky, contradictory storylines, effectively killing off the drawing power of the chief reason why the fans pay their money to see the product in the first place. 

Your opinion might vary, but the fact that only the redone Halloween universe made it to a second film (and depending on who you believe, the only reason that The Sequel That Shall Not Be Named even came to fruition was because Rob Zombie felt like making a 97-minute "fuck you" to critics of his first film) is very telling.  If there was demand for more of them, Michael Bay and his goons would see to it that they would exist, believe me.  My online buddy was right.  42 months after the release of the last film featuring any of these characters (the 2010 Platinum Dunes Nightmare remake), nobody is talking about them.  And that makes the Lick Ness Monster a very sad panda.

But fear not, citizens.  Nothing is beyond saving.  Since this is October and we're trying to keep it positive, here's a guide for how we can bring these horror luminaries back to the forefront where they belong.  Consider it "horror booking for dummies."

1.  JASON VOORHEES
First things first - I don't think the 2009 F13 reboot is terrible.  Having said that, it's not that good, either.  For me, the true staples of the Friday the 13th series are fun, quirky victim characters and cool kills, and I think this movie failed to deliver in a big way in both of these departments.  Instead of yet another reboot, what Jason Voorhees needs at this point is the one thing that the series has always prided itself on - reinvention while also being comforting and familiar.  The movies started off being serious and scary and later morphed into being completely batshit "so bad it's good" entertaining, and I think it would be loads of fun to see a movie that goes back to basics and tries to be both.  My answer?  Jason Takes Christmas, with a group of teens spending the holiday at a cabin near Camp Crystal Lake only to run into the most uncheerful holiday spirit anyone has ever seen.  It sets the action back in the familiar confines of the series instead of, you know, outer space, yet the very simple aesthetic shift of different weather conditions and the Christmas setting adds an entirely new dynamic to the story.  Not to mention weapons (think pick axes, ice skate blades and tree toppers).  One of my real-life friends once complained that this would mean losing the series' much-loved gratuitous nudity dynamic, but I respectfully disagree.  How hard would it be for a couple of the more amorous teens to find a hot tub?

2.  FREDDY KRUEGER
The Platinum Dunes Nightmare film did many things wrong, chief among them the harebrained move of making it seem for the majority of the film as though Freddy was FRAMED for the horrific crimes that got him summarily torched and turned into a dream demon.  It also didn't help that the victim characters (and Rooney Mara in particular) showed about as much raw charisma as Jessica Alba on sedatives.  This series was at its best when Freddy Krueger struck a good balance between schlock and slasher, exemplified best by Dream Warriors, the insanely popular third film.  The template is there.  Why not use it?  Thus, this would be a different take on the Nightmare on Elm Street origin, starting the next film in the midst of a brutal string of mysterious suicides instead of the usual Freddy-Nancy story.  Of course, these deaths would be the handiwork of the familiar guy in the red-and-black striped sweater.  It would be a good idea to amp up both his manicness (but not to an over-the-top degree) and his power in this film, as he has two very determined and very charismatic final girls to contend with who make it their mission to rally the remaining teens to victory - Kristen Parker and Alice Johnson.  Throw in a few interesting quirks for the remaining teens, some hard-hitting deaths, and this guy as Freddy and you've got a real winner with some solid sequel potential.

3.  MICHAEL MYERS
This is perhaps the tallest order of all.  Folks, the damage done to the character of Michael Myers in Rob Zombie's films is just simply mind-boggling, as the dreadlocked rocker took a character who was "the shape of evil" and humanized him.  We spend almost 45 minutes with the unmasked, talking child version of Michael in the first movie, a move that takes away every bit of mystique and sense of danger that the guy in the Shatner mask possessed in the Carpenter-helmed originals.  Still, it could be done.  In this case, I don't think it could be anything less than yet another complete reboot, as the latter movies in the original series are also decidedly character-killing in their own regard.  The best way to accomplish this would be to set the entire film in modern-day Haddonfield, Illinois, starting with Laurie Strode (who in this version is NOT introduced with a ridiculous series of vulgar jokes) going about her daily routine and eventually arriving at young Tommy's house to babysit.  Commence series of killings, and introduce Sam Loomis midway through the movie.  This way, Michael's past survives only in legend and in second-hand retelling by Loomis, restoring the mystique of Myers while also presenting the material in a slightly different manner.  Another wise move would be to make Laurie's friends something other than completely detestable, F-bomb-spewing catty bitches who we actually, you know, DON'T want to see wind up chopped into bitty bits.

Ordinarily, this is where I would throw a summary paragraph in to wrap this little diatribe into a bow, but that's not the case this time, as much like New Beginning Tommy Jarvis I've got nothing to say.  The above are my ideas to give these horror movie main eventers the push they deserve, and if anyone in Hollywood wants to use them they are welcome to do so free of charge.

Dark Water (2002)

Anyone who has followed my reviews for any amount of time knows that I'm a big J-horror mark.  It was the first subgenre that I actively sought out once slasher movies started to wear a little thin, and the VAST (and that word is capitalized for a reason - it can't be overstated enough) difference in setup, pacing and character development from what I was used to popped and resonated with me in a big way. 

Going through some of my archives, I can't believe that I haven't reviewed Dark Water yet.  It was directed by Hideo Nakata, a guy that is held in a pretty high regard in Lick Ness Monster land, considering that he is also the guy behind the certified modern classics Ringu (for my money, one of the ten best horror movies of all time) and Kaidan, as well as the unintentionally hilarious Ring Two here in the States.  Gotta love that deer attack.  In this flick, he's fully in his element, slathering on the foreboding atmosphere like some sort of Little Dooey's style baste.  Award for worst metaphor ever accepted.

One more thing - do not confuse this with the Jennifer Connelly remake.  Not that it's terrible or anything, but it's forgettable as all get out.

2002
Director: Hideo Nakata
Starring Hitomi Kuroki, Rio Kanno, Mirei Oguchi and Fumiyo Kohinata.

PLOT: Let's see if you've heard this one before - a recently divorced mother and her six-year-old daughter move into a new apartment.  Said apartment has slightly creepy but definitely very annoying problem in that it keeps randomly filling with water from the dripping ceiling.  In a surprise that does not come as much of a surprise to the audience, this is connected to some sort of ghostly shenanigans connected to the apartment building.  In other words, you won't remember Dark Water for its minty freshness if you have seen any other number of J-horror epics.  While it has a lot of familiar tropes, however, the specifics make for some great story, as the subplot that runs throughout the entire movie involving motherless daughters elicits a ton of emotional investment.  Oh, and water girl makes one badass villain.
PLOT RATING: *** 1/2 out of ****

CHARACTERS AND ACTING: This is the movie's true ace in the hole, but then again, that's the way it goes for many Japanese horror films.  The vast majority of American horror films I've seen in the 21st century feature a main stable of either hopelessly bland or dislikable characters.  Not so here.  The main characters Yoshimi and Ikuko Matsubara, the AFOREMENTIONED mother and daughter combination finding themselves occupying living space with a vengeful spirit.  Hitomi Kuroki plays the former, and while she is not quite as engaging as Nanako Matsushima in Ringu, she does a fantastic job as someone who is truly desperate on several fronts.  Rio Kanno is Ikuko, turning in one of the better child performances in any horror movie I've seen.  Right up there with the kid from House by the Cemetery, even.  I kid, I kid.  She's way less shrill than that. 
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS: **** out of ****.  Great stuff here.

COOL FACTOR: Much like the slasher subgenre, there is definitely no shortage of cool villains in the J-horror ghost pantheon.  My personal favorite horror villain of all time fits this mold - Kayako Saeki of Ju-On/Grudge fame, the modern day equivalent of the traditional Onryo folktale.  Hideo Nakata operates on an entirely different level from Takashi Shimizu - his horror is in what you DON'T see.  Few guys on the planet are better at keeping a massive slow burn going leading up to a big reveal, and that aspect of Dark Water does not disappoint.  For the vast majority of Stateside viewers, this movie might come off as a little slow, and you won't get much (as in, any) in the way of cool, imaginative Kayako-style deaths.  I will say, however, that this movie has one of the best sustained, gut-wrenching sequences of silence in cinematic history during its finale, and that there are a LOT of directors obsessed with "LOUD NOISES" scares who could learn a thing or two from this scene.
COOL FACTOR: ** 1/2 out of ****.

SUMMARY: If you're a fan of J-horror, it's hard to go wrong with anything Hideo Nakata.  One of this guy's better-known quotes is that a good director can make nothing other than a ghost standing near someone and looking at them scary.  Nakata can accomplish this in his sleep.  Even if you're not a J-horror freak like myself, you can find much to like in Dark Water, as it has an engaging story, a very leisurely pace, likable characters and a truly awesome final five minutes or so consisting of soul-splitting tension without a single drop of blood being spilled.

OVERALL RATING: *** 1/2 out of ****.  Check it out.

"Waxwork" (1988)

Alright, kids, we're going to be trying something different from now on.  In case you haven't noticed, it's been a long time since I've done these reviews with any regularity.  I'd like to give my legions of (four) fans some hare-brained excuse as to why this is, but, really, there isn't any, other than being really, really tired of doing the reviews the way that they had gotten to be.  Namely, gigantic.  Hopefully, this is the beginning of semi-regular updates for the immediate and not-so-immediate future, and after some deep soul-searching that lasted all of five minutes, I decided that the best way to accomplish this was to preserve my own sanity.

Thus, consider this the fun-sizing of the Lick Ness Monster reviews.  Instead of detailing every last nuance of these films, I'll be hitting the high spots as far as what I look for in horror movies - plot, characters and acting, and cool factor, along with a few (but much less) visual aids along the way.

See?  That introduction was only two paragraphs.  I'm already making progress.

YEAR: 1988
DIRECTOR: Anthony Hickox
STARRING: Zach Galligan, Deborah Foreman, Michelle Johnson, Dana Ashbrook, Patrick Macnee and David Warner

THE PLOT: This movie is one of the best examples of "let's get going already right now" I've seen.  It wastes precious little time with anything resembling exposition, instead jumping right into its constant barrage of weirdness and movie/folklore references.  In a nutshell, the movie is about a nutball (unintentional repeated use of a word, I swear) wax museum curator who convinces a group of suburban college students to go for a little night perusing on his property.  The museum itself is basically alive, with different famous horror characters (the werewolf, Dracula, the Mummy, etc.) being represented as well as a few historical figures (the Marquis De Sade, Jack the Ripper).  In the early stages of the movie, we witness a few of these characters wandering onto the wax displays, being transported to the world of the character, and summarily being murdered in some exquisitely gruesome ways.  As the flick enters its second half, we're clued in to the plan of one Mr. David Lincoln (that would be the AFOREMENTIONED museum curator), who is some sort of occultist who needs to sacrifice victims to all of his waxworks in order to take over the world.  Or something.  It comes off a lot better on film than in this description, believe me.
PLOT RATING: *** out of ****.

CHARACTERS AND ACTING: Of course, I should have mentioned that David Warner plays David Lincoln.  Warner is a really, really awesome actor with a pretty long horror pedigree.  If you don't trust me, google him.  Zach Galligan is basically your star as the most prominent of the college kids who find themselves wrapped up in the museum's weird goings-on, and he's not quite Billy Peltzer-likable but far from throw-your-remote at the TV grating.  The rest of the kids, however, are just as disposable as one would expect.
CHARACTERS AND ACTORS: ** 1/2 out of ****.

COOL FACTOR:  My definition of 'cool factor' is just as varied as all the reasons why people enjoy horror movies.  Sometimes, it can mean good gore effects, and that's one thing that [i]Waxwork[/i] has in abundance.  Special FX guru Bob Keen is your makeup maestro for this one, and does a great job creating several truly over-the-top, splatterful set pieces (see above).  Having David Warner around also ups the coolness for pretty much any movie where this statement is true.  If you're in the mood for some decent self-referential (read: non-annoying) humor, look no further than this movie, as seeing all of the various characters together in one movie is a real treat.
COOL FACTOR: *** 1/2 out of ****.

SUMMARY: Waxwork is a very enjoyable, very underrated little gem from the late '80s that somehow flies under the radar of even some hardcore horror fans.  Anthony Hickox, who also directed Hellraiser III as well as the sequel to this film brings a genuine love for the horror genre that shines through in almost every frame.  The finale might get a little Hal Needham-ish, as an army of characters connected to Galligan's grandfather (don't ask) duke it out with Warner's troupe of monsters, but it only dampens the experience slightly from a movie that comes very close to being a bit of a small classic. 
OVERALL RATING: *** out of ****.  Recommended.