Reunion (2015)

"An unstable mental patient goes on an overnight rampage to terrorize an ex-rock star and his friends, only to discover she is linked to him in mysterious ways."

It's not often that I watch and review two indie horror screeners in a row. In previous years, I've tended to be more of a mainstream horror movie reviewer and would have preferred to keep things that way. Unfortunately, the theatrical horror releases this year have been fewer and further between than in the mid '90s, and like a lot of other bloggers, I found myself without anything to write about.

Instead of trying to compete with "zero day reviews" for movies in genres which I don't particularly care for, I've even been desperate enough to try reading books in my spare time (oh, the horror!), and I've now offered my services (dubious as they may be) to absolutely anyone who has a new horror movie to keep me entertained. I suppose it could be worse. At least I'm not watching any more sci-fi movies or comedies.

Unfortunately, for my review of the "Reunion" screener, I've only just finished reading Joe Hill's "Heart-Shaped Box" (2007), and ignoring the supernatural elements from that novel, I noticed more than a few coincidental similarities.

“Reunion” and “Heart-Shaped Box” both tell stories which feature a former rock star, contain scenes of domestic abuse fuelled by alcoholism, have characters with memories blotted out, exposition is revealed in flashbacks, and of course, their protagonists get stalked and sliced-up. There are other things, but I'm not allowed to say what they are at this time. My hands are tied, but I'm sure you'll finger it out... I mean figure it out for yourselves. Oops.

Although I've agreed not to give away any spoilers, some key elements also remind me of several of the late Richard Laymon's novels from my misspent youth, and I'll tentatively throw-in that there may also be some nods to "Halloween II" (1981), "Halloween" (2007), and ""Fright" (1971) as well. That being said, "Reunion" is far more modern and more in the realms of "extreme horror" than its precursors.

Lest I be misconstrued, I'm not saying that writer Bert Havird or director Shawn Chou consciously "borrowed" anything, especially as the movie adaptation of "Heart-Shaped Box" has been stalled for years, but "Reunion" is very much in the same vein and will definitely keep Joe Hill fans satiated. I know that I was.

With its non-linear storytelling and somewhat harrowing subject matter, "Reunion" might be a struggle for regular people to get through. There's a lot of shakycam for one thing, and there are several borderline arty moments which could put traditionalists off. If I wanted to be overcritical and harsh, I'd call the cinematography "pretentious and overambitious", but it's always better to be overambitious than to have no ambition at all, isn't it?

It's all very involved, and there's quite a lot (maybe too much) to keep track of. Even with a standard running time of just over an hour and a half, "Reunion" feels much longer and is emotionally draining to watch even for the most hardcore slasher aficionado. Underneath it all, however, you'll be pleased to know that the usual slasher tropes, character flaws, and stupid decisions abound. Yes, there's some fun stuff here too.

As I'm sworn to secrecy about the major plot points, I can't reveal anything more about “Reunion” other than it's a classy production with great performances and gallons of blood. I'm not sure if this movie is going to be as well received by the general horror fandom as something like “Starry Eyes” (2014), but it's likely to be very highly rated by millennial indie horror fans.

“Reunion” stars Maria Olsen, Jack Turner, Sarah Schreiber, Reign Morton, and Cara Santana. The supporting cast includes Ruth Reynolds, Arielle Brachfeld, Christopher Wolfe, Leif Gantvoort, and Matthew Jaeger.

For further details, please check out the official Facebook page.

Here's another teaser trailer:

Baby Shower (2011)

"Four ex-classmates get together to celebrate the pregnancy of one of them. The venue chosen for the party is a country house located one hour away from the city. It has been a while since the four of them saw each other for the last time, and one recently committed betrayal threatens to destroy their long and deep friendship. The revelation of a dark secret and a series of violent deaths transform the baby shower into a nightmare. A very disturbing one."

Something which surprised me after watching "Baby Shower", and then looking up reviews to steal pictures from, is that there aren't any positive reviews of this movie to be found on the IMDb (or anywhere else for that matter). That seems very odd to me, and means one of two things: either not enough people have seen this movie yet, or a lot of copying and pasting has been done from one review to another. Bearing in mind that the "critics" in every case mainly retell the story in their own spoilerific words, I have no respect for any of them, least of all one who hated the movie because it had subtitles, and another douchebag who I know didn't give it his full attention because he practically lives on Twitter.

I have no idea what director Pablo Illanes did to upset these "reviewers" apart from placing non-comedic versions of the "Sex and the City" girls in the middle of a Chilean forest and bumping them off in fabulously gory ways—especially as I think the whole idea is absolutely fantastic—so just because he's managed to bring one of my own sordid dreams to life, I'm going to give "Baby Shower" a thoroughly positive review to redress the balance.

Okay, I admit that in my imagination, it would only be the most irritating characters from "Sex and the City" being tortured in insanely erotic ways that wouldn't ever legally make it to film, but you have to take what you can get. Obviously, nobody would want to see anything bad happen to Charlotte (Kristin Davis), since she's the only pretty one in the show, and I'm pleased to say that her lookalike Ángela (Ingrid Isensee) doesn't suffer too much either (except emotionally!). Everyone else does—oh, yes, indeedy—and there's lots of blood, nudity, and mean-spiritness to enjoy here!

Aside from (but including) the boobs and blood, the cinematography is sometimes quite beautiful, especially for a low-budget foreign movie (if you can call $900,000 low-budget!), and the location looks the part. Where logically there should be spaciousness, the atmosphere is parodoxically claustrophobic, and that takes some doing, especially as the camera looks at everything you want to see and quite a few unpleasant things which most people don't!

"You have to let go of who you were to become who you will be."

With a hint of "Rosemary's Baby" (1968) and a little bit of the craziness from "Inside" (2007), the plot itself isn't the most original, but it's handled in a much better way than either of those aforementioned borefests. Let's face it, I might like "Rosemary's Baby" myself, but it's still 45 years old and has become horribly dated now. It was never very believable to begin with, and teenagers are more likely to laugh at it. On the other hand, "Inside" is simply an overrated idiot play with unrealistic gore, and I'll never understand its appeal if I live to be a hundred.

Thus, even with its stereotypical characters which aren't really developed, and other clichés such as non-functioning cell phones abounding, "Baby Shower" is much more suitable for a modern audience, especially if they're sick puppies like me who appreciate realistic woundings and creative kills. The fact that the actresses are some of the best-looking women in Chile also doesn't hurt. Just pick out your favourite and enjoy her for as long as she remains on screen.

Once again, I'm not going to give any spoilers because I hate it when other people do that. Suffice it to say that the sexy "Samantha" character called Olivia (Claudia Burr) steals the show from creepy lunatic Soledad (Patricia López), but the rest of the cast are still impressive. In particular, Sofía García, Francisca Merino, and Kiki Rojo don't play typical helpless victims; they fight back and scream very well indeed!

The only eyecandy for the ladies is Álvaro Gómez as Julio whose first appearance is shirtless and riding a horse, so you can imagine the impression that makes! He's not quite Marcus Tandy from "Eldorado", but women shouldn't be watching horror movies for hunky men anyway. To be honest, women shouldn't ever watch horror movies like this in the first place because they'll only bitch about the gratuitous nudity, misogynistic violence, and rape afterwards. I've had enough of those prudes to last me a lifetime, and I'm sure you have too.

As "Baby Shower" isn't available on DVD yet (except in Germany), you'll have to be a Netflix subscriber to see it legally anywhere else, but you should definitely check it out if you're into the gory stuff, and unlike some dumbass reviewers, you don't mind reading subtitles.

Highly recommended.

Blood on the Dance Floor made a horror video!

Not only have Dahvie and Jayy made a mini horror movie for their new song 'Damaged", but they've made it as an extreme horror movie with some lovely torture at the end too. Bloody brilliant! This'll keep the haters busy for a while!

From some of things Dahvie Vanity has been saying on Twitter, and knowing his taste in movies, I had a feeling that he would do something like this eventually. It was still a nice surprise to see it actually happen though.

Directed by Rob Zombie's cinematographer Patrick Fogerty, "Damaged" boasts some impressively mean-spirited gore which is above and beyond what you'd normally see in a music video. The CGI fire and blood splatter effects give away that "Damaged" isn't a big-budget production, and it's a bit tongue-in-cheek (or tongue-in-a-pair-of-forceps to be precise), but posting it on YouTube is bound to be controversial.

Although a more cohesive storyline would have sorted out the slight incongruity between the style of the song itself and the visuals, the practical effects are used well, and the message that the boys want to get across is pretty clear. The "Bad Blood" album is very much Blood on the Dance Floor's love letter to their critics, and their fans will love this!

I don't expect "Damaged" to be available on YouTube for long until some prude or hater flags it, so watch it while you can!

Also check out Blood on the Dance Floor's official website at www.ilovebotdf.com.

Frankenstein's Army (2013)

"Toward the end of World War II, Russian soldiers pushing into eastern Germany stumble across a secret Nazi lab, one that has unearthed and begun experimenting with the journal of one Dr. Victor Frankenstein."

As a rule, I loathe faux "found footage" movies, but sometimes there can be an exception. I may moan about the subgenre being oversaturated with crap, but I'll still watch yet another one of these "Blair Witch Project" clones if there's nothing else available. In this case, it's a Dutch horror movie filmed in the Czech Republic with heavily-accented English dialogue. Call me naive, but that sounds intriguing enough on its own. The fact that it's called "Frankenstein's Army" and contains lots of "Soviets versus Nazis" wartime action is just icing on the cake.

Having watched it three times in a row, I'm pleased to report that "Frankenstein's Army" does not disappoint. That's the first time I've ever written that overused, archaic and cringeworthy phrase in one of my reviews, so now you know this movie is even more special.

"Frankenstein's Army" really kind of rocks somewhat, but I'm not going to get too carried away with the overpraise because I still hate the handheld shakycam gimmick. I'm not sure why director Richard Raaphorst took that route for his debut feature, but maybe he wasn't confident enough in his cameraman's ability to use a tripod. The good news is that it isn't even remotely as nauseating to watch as any other found footage movie—well, not in the motion-sickness way—but the bad news is that it doesn't look like real found footage due to the subject matter. The Russians would be speaking Russian rather than English for one thing! It would still look fake if there were subtitles everywhere though because the attention to detail in other areas doesn't try to disguise that it's a modern film. Subtitles would simply alienate the dumber horror fans who don't like to read, so I can accept why it was done this way.

It's probably wise that the "found footage" wasn't made to look too real anyway because I'd hate for any the far-fetched cyborgs to exist in real life. The extreme horrors shown are more than enough for most people without adding another level of cruelty. The monsters are such artfully created nightmares of dead flesh and machinery that I think whoever came up with their designs must have something very wrong with them in all the sick and twisted ways I like, but anyone squeamish who watches this will not be happy. This is certainly not a "date night" movie unless you want to end up sleeping alone. "Frankenstein's Army" is a gorehound's delight, full of truly horrific and gruesome stuff, which makes a refreshing change from the wimpy PG-13s and R-rated punch-pullers lately.

"A man of vision is always misunderstood."

The biggest problem with finding a horror movie which I actually like is writing about why I like it without spoiling it for everybody else. I've also been so negative for so long that having a decent movie in my clutches is a surprise which almost renders me speechless. I want to pull out all the bog-standard descriptive words and phrases such as "awesome", "amazing, "fantastic", "I was blown away", and "the best horror movie that I've seen this year" except that none of them would be applicable in this particular case. "Frankenstein's Army" is very entertaining, practical effects-laden film, and on a purely subjective level, I loved it for its blood and guts, but as usual, there are flaws.

I've already mentioned how the found footage camerawork isn't something which I'm keen on, and the contrivances about who is carrying the camera and why are blatant in every scene. Occasional "Stop filming!" or "Film this!" orders draw more attention to the fakery than is necessary. Once the action kicks in, "Frankenstein's Army" sometimes feels more like playing a "first person shooter" computer game with no ammunition left rather than watching a movie, but that's my only other gripe. Although there's an obligatory "I'm so sorry, Mum and Dad!" homage to "The Blair Witch Project", I can also let that pass because it's quite important to the speaker's motivation.

Apart from the accents and linguistic skills, there's not much to the acting although everyone gets a chance to do something impressive. In particular, Joshua Sasse (a British actor) is very charismatic as the Polish Sergei, and Alexander Mercury is perfectly cast as Dimitri. Andrei Zayats, who seems destined to be typecast as a Russian soldier for the rest of his career, is very realistic as Vassili. Despite having yet more stereotypical character names (Sacha, Ivan, Alexei, etc.), the other cast members are equally strong only in much smaller roles.

The most famous face is Karel Roden as Viktor Frankenstein. Horror fans will probably only remember him as Dr. Varava from "Orphan" (2009), which is a bit of shame since he's been in exactly 100 roles to date. At first, I thought he was Srdjan Todorovic, the star of "A Serbian Film" (2010), because there's definitely a similarity. If there's a weak link in the chain, it's that his performance isn't manic or obsessive enough to appease hardcore "Frankenstein" fans, but this movie is a long way from Mary Shelley's novel in any case.

"Frankenstein's Army" is a nicely paced fusion of classic horror and wartime fantasy which I highly recommend. It's not available on DVD until September 10th, and its very limited theatrical release may not be in your area, but you can watch it now on Amazon's Instant Video service. I suggest that you do so immediately.

How many "Extreme Horror" movies have you seen?

I found this video on YouTube earlier and, although I've seen about 80% of the movies listed, there's no way that I've seen them all. There are some movies on there which simply don't interest me, not because they are gory (because I love that) but due to being poorly filmed, amateur, handycam dreck which I don't have the patience for.

I'm also not overly keen on Japanese extreme horror movies either because they are just a bit too silly for my own taste but I'm sure somebody likes them or they wouldn't exist in the first place.

Until "A Serbian Film" came along, the nastiest thing I'd seen was "Martyrs" and I still think it's the best of all of them.

Anyway, how many of these extreme horror movies have you seen? Which ones are your favourites? Let me know in the comments below.

Martyrs (2008)

Jesus wept! If you've never seen "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" (or even if you have!) then "Martyrs" is likely to be the most brutal and horrific movie you've ever seen.

Following in the tradition of other French horrors such as "Haute Tension", "Ils", and "A L'interieur", 'Martyrs" is tense, disturbing, violent, and somewhat ludicrous (if you think about it too much) yet absolutely sickening (and very entertaining) in ways that only true horror fans can fully appreciate. Yes, "Martyrs" does provide that horror "buzz" that we've all been chasing for years and is unlikely to disappoint anybody.

It's half revenge story and half "Hostel" but with much better acting than any of Eli Roth's films contain and with considerably more realistic effects. In fact it's this realism that gives it the edge over most American movies in the same almost "torture porn" sub-genre. There's real drama here too and, for the most part, believable characters who you can actually empathise with without overlong introductions so to even start to think of it in the same vein as something like the "Saw" franchise would be a big mistake. In many ways, it's more like a logical progression from the more arty European films like "Salo" or "Calvaire" but follows the Aristotlean rule that "art is best when hidden". "Martyrs" will, by turns, shock you and give you something to think about which is both its strength and its weakness but more on that later.

The practical effects and make-up are outstanding and there are no over-the-top CGI blood spurts like a lot of these gorefests have contained lately. There's nothing much here to break the "willing suspension of disbelief" although a certain scene involving a hastily dropped sandwich almost ruined it for me because I thought it was wasteful. It's funny how the little things like that can throw you right out of the story when you notice them and you will now too because I've just mentioned it. You'll find others along the way but hang in there as they are all "blink and you'll miss them" moments.

For those who are less eagle-eyed, pedantic and geeky, there are lots of boobs and blood. Oh God, there's so much blood! There are slicings galore, scenes of extreme torture, body-shredding gunshots, and a denouement which will absolutely amaze you. The ending itself will fly over most people's heads though and cause a lot of internet searching for others who want to know and can't work it out. I admit that I went vainly in search of answers too as the one I'd made up in my own mind was the least likely to be correct. There's some kind of nihilistic philosphical message at the end of this which I just can't get my brain around.

If you think you've seen everything with the "Saw" movies or "August Underground" then think again. Imagine any of those films with much better camerawork and without the grainy look and you'd only be a fraction of the way there. This is real cinematic stuff which, because it's never likely to be shown anywhere theatrically, really needs to be watched alone on the biggest widescreen TV that you have available even if it's just to see every facial expression of the lead actresses. Almost every shot is perfect and the actresses are beautiful even if they don't stay that way for very long. It's not a sexy film by any means though. This is all bleak, mean-spirited stuff but done so well that you just can't turn it off even though you know that you'll end up thinking about it for a long time after.

There are very few films that I've enjoyed yet wished that I'd never watched and this is one of them. Yes, it's a paradox. Films like "Martyrs" leave a nasty taste in your mouth afterwards and make you wonder what the hell is wrong with the people who make them to begin with. That said, it does exactly what a horror film should do - it "horrifies". I can't criticise the makers for creating exactly the effect that I want from a film but I wish there had been a happier ending.

Yes, I'm back to that ending again. In spite of all the shocks and gore, the ending is left to the viewer to interpret. I've encountered this before with such films as "The Univited Guest" and it really is annoying if you're used to having stories handed to you on a plate in Hollywood style. Some arty-farty people will see it as one of "Martyrs" strengths but from a purely entertainment point of view, I found it to be a major weakness. The catharsis that should have occurred is left to work itself out by gnawing away at the viewer long after the film has ended and that simply isn't a good way to do things. It leads to a great deal of dissatisfaction which, translated into normal viewing terms, would probably elicit a "That sucked!" response in 75% of cases. Maybe I'm wrong here though and people will get it or maybe I'm right and "Martyrs" will end up in the same pile as "Haute Tension" with comments like "Good film apart from the ending" attached to them for all eternity. It's not a polarising film by any means though so even if you don't "get" the ending, I don't suppose it'll matter. I didn't get it either but I still think "Martyrs" is one of the greatest horror movies ever made.

For that reason, I recommend "Martyrs" to everyone. This is one of the best movies so far this century and more than makes up for the overhyped "Inside" and "Frontière(s)" which have caused so many message board arguments. Couple it with "The Girl Next Door" as a double feature and I guarantee you'll have nightmares for a while no matter how hardcore you think you are.