Nightlife (1989)

"A beautiful female vampire awakens after a hundred years of slumber to find herself in modern-day Mexico City, in this tongue-in-cheek thriller from director Daniel Taplitz."

Not to be confused with the zombie-comedy "Night Life" (with a two word title) from the same year, "Nightlife" is a made-for-TV vampire-comedy starring Maryam d'Abo, Ben Cross, and Keith Szarabajka.

As far as I know, "Nightlife" is not available on DVD, and although you will find it to watch online in all the usual places, the VHS version has become ridiculously expensive. For a low-budget TV movie which is only slightly above average, the price has obviously been driven up by VHS collectors rather than vampire movie fans. Having said that, there's still a lot to like about "Nightlife".

Dealing with the most obvious thing first, "Nightlife" has Maryam d'Abo in it only two years after her breakthrough role as a Bond-girl in "The Living Daylights". Although I don't have a "thing" for her, many people do, and she's certainly very attractive as the vampire Angelique.

"She's in better condition than my wife!"

The coincidence that there's also an Angelique (played by Lysette Anthony) in "Dark Shadows", and Ben Cross went on to play another vampire, namely Barnabas Collins, in the same 1991 TV series, won't be wasted on collectors of such trivia or vampire aficionados. As Vlad (no originality there!), Ben Cross delivers an often menacing and scenery-chewing performance, which clearly got him noticed and typecast as another vampire later.

Because "Nightlife" is a romantic-comedy at its core, Keith Szarabajka, who I've occasionally confused with a young Nick Nolte or even John Heard, plays Dr. David Zuckerman in a traditional yet occasionally comedic manner as he falls in love with his vampire patient. While not the most charismatic or heroic actor in the world (although he was great in "The Equalizer" TV series), he suits the part, and his chemistry with Maryam d'Abo mostly works.

Blurry VHS makes everyone look younger.

Having mentioned John Heard, "Nightlife" has a noticeable similarity to "Cat People" (1982), especially the relationship between Oliver Yates (John Heard) and Irena Gallier (Nastassja Kinski). Just replace Paul Gallier (Malcolm McDowell) with Ben Cross, and the "eternal triangle" is complete. I'm not saying that anyone copied anyone else here. The sexual rivalry is simply a standard element of most "rom-coms".

As a PG-13 rated vampire movie, "Nightlife" doesn't have a lot of blood, and its comedy is subdued enough to cause the drama to be slightly more serious than it should be. Glenn Shadix from "Beetlejuice" (1988) turns up as an unnamed vampire, Camille Saviola gives an over-the-top performance as Angelique's maid Rosa Mercedes, and there are a couple of witty lines, but there's nothing which will make anyone laugh out loud. I think the lack of comedy works in this movie's favour, however, and makes it a lot more palatable for those of us who don't like horror-comedies.

There's not much else to say about "Nightlife" other than it was filmed on location in Mexico City. It doesn't have many sets (and the few it does have are a bit sparse), some of the camerawork is dodgy, and the "I Put a Spell on You" song by Jay Hawkins is overused. Apart from those minor quibbles, it's fine.

With my rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia firmly in place, I'm going to rate "Nightlife' slightly higher than most people would. "Nightlife" was one of the first vampire movies which I reviewed for a magazine many years ago, and I've enjoyed it watching it again.

Mortdecai (2015)

"Juggling angry Russians, the British Mi5, and an international terrorist, debonair art dealer and part time rogue Charlie Mortdecai races to recover a stolen painting rumoured to contain a code that leads to lost Nazi gold."

As I've moved further and further away from the purest forms of the horror genre with nearly every review this year (mainly because there aren't any new horror movies left other than a few bottomfeeder indie ones on the VOD streams which I'm not likely to ever care about anyway), I thought that I might as well watch something completely different for this "Surprise Sunday".

Although I freely admit to disliking comedies in general (especially since the American ones are usually more spiteful and mean-spirited than horror), sometimes people need a little bit of comic relief in their lives. I have no problem with that. Just because comedy isn't really meant for me, it doesn't mean that I can't still objectively appreciate the merits of a film within that genre. Drama is drama, and a good story will usually entertain me regardless.

Thus, I decided to watch "Mortdecai". Having heard nothing but bad things about this R-rated box office flop from the "critics" (and the usual snarky assholes all over the internet), I also set myself a challenge to see if I would agree with them or end up being a contrarian.

This is the poster. Obviously.

Unfortunately, despite "Mortdecai" having a great cast of credible acting talents, a huge budget, and quite beautiful camerawork in places, I have to come down on the side of the critics. "Mortdecai" looks like a Brosnan-era "James Bond" film, but the story is both confusing and drawn out in equal measures, and the best thing it has going for it is the amusing Johnny Depp and Paul Bettany double-act which reminds me (and everybody else) of Inspector Clouseau and Cato (albeit with British accents).

I've never actually watched any of the "Pink Panther" movies in their entirety, mind you, but I saw substantial parts of most of them on television as a child. Mainly due to clip show quizzes such as the BBC's "Screen Test", some of the slapstick fighting scenes stuck in my memory. Therefore, whether the homages in "Mortdecai" are intentional or accidental, I have no real way of knowing. I have absolutely no desire to ever attempt to watch them again. Fans of Inspector Clouseau, however, will know for sure.

No funny caption for this. Something about carrying the film, maybe?

Moving on to things which I can properly appreciate, the stunts are very good, the locations were well chosen and dressed beforehand, and I don't have any real problem with the script. Other than Johnny Depp channelling Terry Thomas, none of it is that funny though, and the moustache gags are very repetitive and overused. "Mortdecai" also clearly suffers from pacing problems and padding more than a few times, but that still doesn't completely wreck the somewhat challenging non-linear narrative which is its own worst enemy.

Including small roles for Paul Whitehouse (who Brits like me tend to love) early on and Jeff Goldblum two-thirds in, the main problem with "Mortdecai" is that it doesn't allow any of the supporting players apart from Ewan McGregor to really stand out. Although I'm pretty sure that nobody involved wanted to create anything other than a Depp-centric product to entertain an audience for an hour and a half, sadly, it shows.

"Mortdecai" won't be winning any Oscars or major awards (unless the world goes even more batshit insane than it has done in the last two years), and it's not the most original comedy-spy movie that I've ever seen either, but it's relatively okay for what it is. It's not as good as any of the "Austin Powers" movies by any stretch of the imagination, but it has many intentionally amusing moments and a couple of extremely nauseating ones.

The Human Centipede III: Final Sequence (2015)

"Taking inspiration from The Human Centipede films, the warden of a notorious and troubled prison looks to create a 500-person human centipede as a solution to his problems."

Featuring extended cameos by Robert LaSardo (best known for playing Escobar Gallardo in "Nip/Tuck"), Eric Roberts (who clearly is not likely to be remembered for anything apart from being Julia Roberts' brother), and director Tom Six himself, this final entry in the now worn-out but once hilarious Human Centipede joke is undoubtedly on most people's "must see" list. Hell, it beats watching the dubious "Poltergeist" remake or the equally crappy-looking "We Are Still Here" this weekend, doesn't it?

Even more political incorrect (it kind of says so on the poster) than the previous installments, "The Human Centipede III" certainly does not disappoint. From the opening scene where Dieter Laser (playing the insane prison warden Bill Boss) fingers sexy Bree Olson (as Daisy, Bill Boss' beautiful personal assistant and sex toy) in front of Laurence Harvey (Dwight Butler now rather than Martin), you know that things can only get better. Or worse. It all depends on your point of view. Normal people will laugh at it, Right-wingers will laugh with it, and Lefties just shouldn't ever watch this movie without adult supervision because it will make them cry like the entitled little babies they are all over the internet forever and ever amen.

"You're a sadistic, vile, asshole!"

As a "meta" movie, "The Human Centipede III" often strays too far up its own arse (pun self-consciously intended) to actually be "in-joke" funny, but with decent production values (not unlike those of Full Moon) and a cast who know that they are supposed to be chewing the scenery (another pun there) as much as possible, it's quite amusing. Standouts are obviously the maniacal double-act of Dieter Laser and Laurence Harvey, but you know, that's exactly why they are in this movie in the first place.

Of course, it's all as predictable and as offensive as can be, but that's the point. There's racism, sexism, patriotism, and all the other "isms" that drive those irritating progressive-liberals batshit crazy. Plus there's more than one blatant attempt at injecting some damning condemnation of the American prison system into this satire. It doesn't entirely work (since everything about the justice system in America is constantly mocked by the rest of the civilised world), but Tom Six is a goddamned genius-troll with these things, and you just have to admire him for it. I wish he could direct an episode of "Orange is the New Black" in the same style.

Orange is the New Centipede.

As usual, I'm not going to give any major spoilers. This blog is only supposed to a free "guide" rather than a collection of moral essays after all. Another reason is that, hard as it may be to do so, "The Human Centipede III" is best viewed with as little prior knowledge as possible. There are a few gruesome shocks but much less gore than in its predecessors, and of course, things turn out very badly indeed for everyone involved. Highlighting every fart that goes to fair about how and why will absolutely ruin it for you.

Although never likely to be talked about as much as "The Human Centipede", nor quite as disturbing as "The Human Centipede II", "The Human Centipede III" is good wholesome family entertainment which should keep everyone amused on this Memorial Day (also known as just another barbecue day) weekend.

Highly recommended to Tom Six fans and sick fucks with a sense of humour everywhere.

Ghost Team One (2013)

"Two roommates deathly afraid of ghosts both fall in love with a girl who believes their home is haunted."

I don't know why everyone is calling "Ghost Team One" a "comedy". It isn't funny, and it doesn't even have a particularly happy ending. What it does have is lots of awkwardness and the same atmosphere as the American version of "The Office" (which also isn't funny), and of course, a hot chick (or two) to ogle.

"Ghost Team One" is essentially another completely unneccessary "Paranormal Activity" parody which brings the number of such abominations up to an unlucky 13. How and why this has become a subgenre in itself is undoutedly due to the YouTube generation who can't seem to get enough of webcams, shakycams, and mediocrity. For those of us who prefer a real movie, these faux found footage movies are mostly an annoying waste of time.

There are a couple of neat effects in "Ghost Team One" which you don't often see in a glorified YouTube video like this, but it isn't a horror movie by any stretch of the imagination either. In fairness, though, I don't think it was ever intended to be. It's not "found footage horror" per se that this movie is lampooning but the whole "amateur-looking footage" subgenre in general. Even YouTube gets targetted!

The downfall with this, however, is that "Ghost Team One" is as tame as its targets when it comes to the adult situations: Punches are pulled everywhere, e.g. pornographic images on a bedroom wall are pixellated, and the "jokes" (if you can call them that) are little more than schoolboyish. Think Benny Hill but less creepy with it. For a movie which uses the promise of "horny ghosts" as its selling point (especially as the only ghost in it is supposed to have been a Vietnamese prostitute!), it's very disappointing.

Two guys I've never heard of and Fernanda Romero.

As I have no sense of humour when it comes to comedy-horror movies, spoofs or otherwise, I hate to say it, but I was slightly entertained by "Ghost Team One" in a low-rent "Men Behaving Badly" (British version, naturally) way. It's well written, the drama is nicely done, and the characters are stupidly amiable but harmless enough. Once you get used to the awful camerawork, the whole purpose of "Ghost Team One" is only an excuse to lust over Fernanda Romero anyway. If Fernanda wasn't in it, I doubt that I would have made it to the end.

Fernanda Romero (who keeps her real first name and clothes on throughout) steals every scene she's in to such an extent that "Ghost Team One" is best described as her "vehicle". If anyone else involved in this movie is deluded enough to think otherwise, they need to grab themselves a reality check next time they go to 7-Eleven for their taquitos and slushies, and understand that, apart from a few infantilised adults (who were born in the '80s and '90s) and their friends, the majority of people who will eventually buy this movie on DVD or Blu-ray are just going to skip to the parts with Fernanda in and crack open another box of tissues. Yes, she really is that hot!

Putting the novelty value of "Ghost Team One" as a "latino" movie aside, since I often tend to overrate any kind of Spanish or Mexican movie even when they are filmed in Los Angeles, I don't recommend this one. I'll give everybody credit for having a go, but "Ghost Team One" would have been better as a series of webisodes.

Fernanda Romero is the centre of attention.

Fright Night 2: New Blood (2013)

"By day Gerri Dandridge is a sexy professor, but by night she transforms into a real-life vampire with an unquenchable thirst for human blood. So when a group of high school students travel abroad to study in Romania, they find themselves ensnared in her chilling web of lust and terror."

Er... this new "Fright Night 2" isn't a sequel, it's another remake! Should I call it a "requel" or a "semake"? Naw, I'll just call it "another piece of straight-to-DVD crap" because that's exactly what it is.

Directed by Eduardo Rodriguez who made "Curandero" (2005), and starring a load of Brits and Romanians who nobody has heard of before, this sequel in name only isn't that bad in places, but it's still not very good overall. It's better than the the 2011 remake (which I refuse to review) and the real "Fright Night Part 2" (1988), but it's a lot less entertaining than the first "Fright Night" (1985). Having said that, I'm not a big fan of that movie either.

The new Gerri Dandridge is played by Jamie Murray, aka the hot chick from "Devil's Playground" (2010) and "Botched" (2007), but I didn't recognise her until I looked up the cast list. It's been far too long since I reviewed her previous movies, and she hasn't cropped up in anything else that I've seen until now.

The benefit of keeping a blog, of course, is being able to look up such details and make myself look like an idiot, but in my defence, even someone with an enormous brain like mine can't be expected to remember absolutely everything about the thousands of movies which have come and gone in the last three years. "Dexter" and "Warehouse 13" fans on the IMDb seem to know all about Jamie Murray for some reason, but I've never watched an episode of either TV series in my life and have no intention of doing so. She's an acceptable vampiress in "Fright Night 2", but it's due to her model looks and Kelly LeBrock accent rather than her acting.

Nice teeth!

The second major difference is that this "Fright Night 2" is full of boobs. Not just one or two boobs, but lots and lots of boobs! Combine them with some lesbian canoodling, a visit to a stripclub, bathfuls (or indoor swimming pools) of blood, and an animated comic strip, and it's got everything today's teenagers could want, right? Who cares that you've got Brits with fake American accents (that are probably looped), a load of crappy CGI, nobody you could give a damn about, and a completely unoriginal story? None of that matters. The morons will see the title on the DVD and rent or buy it anyway, won't they? That's what 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment are hoping will happen.

In its favour, "Fright Night 2: New Blood" at least attempts to put a new spin on things by taking everything to Romania. Why? Probably because it's traditional to set vampire movies in Romania, and it's a lot cheaper to film there! It also brings Countess Elizabeth Báthory into the story and gives her bat-like sonar, which I don't think I've ever seen in a vampire movie before. I mean, obviously I've seen "Countess Dracula" (1971) and other movies with that character in, but the sonar thing is a novelty.

Far less entertaining is the new Peter Vincent, played by Sean Power, who is now a "monster hunter" in some bogus reality TV show rather than a horror host or even a magician. Mercifully, he doesn't have much time on screen. In comparison, David Tennant wasn't that bad. Okay, he was still awful, but he just wasn't as bad as this drunken oaf. Sean Power (who has a great name, by the way) is only in this movie for the sake of having a Peter Vincent of some kind, and doesn't do anything important one way or another. He doesn't even kill Evil Ed!

British nerds playing American nerds.

It's not really worth mentioning the new Evil Ed except to say that the kid behaves like such a dick that I'm surprised Stephen Geoffreys' bat-sonar (i.e. gaydar) wasn't buzzing! He almost makes the new Charley Brewster look mature! Charley Brewster is still a horrible character though and his girlfriend Amy isn't any better. I couldn't care less what the names of the actors are who played them as I don't expect they'll be in anything else but British soap operas which I'll never see.

As much as I can usually find something of merit in any vampire movie, I had quite a struggle with this one. It's another sign of how creatively dead the American horror industry has become. "Fright Night 2: New Blood" is simply a pointless and unnecessary third remake disguised as a sequel to a remake which nobody wanted. Sadly, I expect there'll be a fourth one eventually too.

The World's End (2013)

"Five friends who reunite in an attempt to top their epic pub crawl from 20 years earlier unwittingly become humankind's only hope for survival."

Since I've been discovering far too many good movies recently, rather than tempt fate to throw a load of bad ones my way, I decided to redress the balance with a day of more torture than one person should ever have to endure. There may be no power on Earth which could ever get me to rewatch "Shaun of the Dead" (2004), but I finally watched "Hot Fuzz" (2007) and followed it up with "The World's End". Such a heroic act has to keep karma quiet for a while, doesn't it?

Although I can freely admit that I enjoyed "Hot Fuzz" almost until the end, I only did so as it was a kind of half-way house between the greatness of "Men Behaving Badly" (the British version) and the smarmy creepiness of Mitchell and Webb's "Peep Show" to prepare me for worse to come. Laddish comedy is so '90s and over now that movies such as "The Cornetto Trilogy" (or whatever the Hell these are called) are little more than throwbacks. I liked Olivia Colman's character, was amazed at how realistic Simon Pegg was as a far too politically correct cop, but the running gag with the swan stole the show. Let's face it, "Hot Fuzz" is only a comedic homage to "The Wicker Man" with a couple of lovely gore scenes anyway. Adam Buxton wearing a piece of church as a head is memorable, but nothing else.

I don't know what it is about the combination of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (with Edgar Wright as the director) which irritates me so much. It's not as if any of them owe me money or something; I just have a completely irrational loathing of them based on their movies. Thus, as you can imagine, I really wasn't looking forward to "The World's End"—even the title gave away that it was going to be yet another pub-centric fiasco which isn't funny—but surprisingly, I wasn't dead set against it either. If anything, my pre-movie mood could be described as hesitantly curious.

The thing you have to remember is that I have absolutely no sense of humour. It just doesn't exist for me in any kind of "laughing out loud" way, so I tend to watch comedies as dramas and note the wit, stunts, or happy endings which would place the subject matter in the correct category. When it comes to comedy, I'm 100% objective because I have no physical way of being subjective about it. For that reason, I can say everything that I need to say about "The World's End" in a few quick paragraphs.

Stop reading now if you don't want spoilers!

"This is a pub! We are in a pub! What are we going to do now?"

"The World's End" is very good indeed for the first 40 minutes. It's nicely filmed, the backstory is well told as an introduction, the characterisation is decent, the location is perfectly British, and several recognisable TV faces make everything comfortable. The witty banter reveals that the former bad boy hero is now a bit of a dick, his friends are easily led, and they're all uncommonly stupid, but it's aimiable enough. Sadly, everything goes horribly wrong when the first robots (or "blanks") appear. The whole mood of the film is killed in one fell swoop and never recovers afterwards.

What would have been better as a straightforward comedy about the reunion of old schoolfriends who reveal their secrets and discover a few more during a pub crawl then turns into a stupid parody of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"! WTF? WTF indeed! It's a pity that "Shaun of the Dead" already covered zombies because aliens are too far-fetched and ridiculous to be entertaining for me. I don't believe in aliens, I'm not even sure that there's intelligent life left on this planet, let alone anywhere else in the universe, and if there's one thing which will make me switch the channel on the TV instantly, it's anything about aliens. Unfortunately, you can't do the same thing in a movie theatre, and walking out wastes $12.

After a few text-speak jokes, the second-half of "The World's End" is a bunch of repetitive fight scenes which become extremely tedious by the third or fourth time they happen. There are, after all, only so many robot arms and legs you can pull off or eggshell heads you can crush before the action scenes fall into the same trap as the running-joke about "Starbucking" and identical-looking pubs. Needless to say, the carefully crafted characters are lost among the spectacle of effects and explosions, some of them physically. What a shame.

As I'm not down with the kids, I don't know if Pierce Brosnan's cameo is meant to be a special secret or a selling point, but either way, you know about it now. His former "Die Another Day" Bond-girl Rosamund Pike is on the alternative posters, so you already know that she's in this and is just as easy on the eye 11 years later. She doesn't have a very big role either, but ironically, she's on screen more than Pierce Brosnan in this movie.

Maybe if I had been as drunk as the characters were supposed to be, "The World's End" might been more entertaining, but I didn't completely hate it. Despite easily being the second weakest of the three Pegg-Frost-Wright movies and ending with a half-arsed swipe at our de-humanising reliance on modern technology, I'm sure comedy fans would get something out of it. It's simply a film of two halves—and twelve pints—which, just like this review, isn't very well written. That shitty ending which I'm sure everyone thought would be so clever is still too rushed, disappointing and unsatisfying for everyone except the characters themselves though. Stupidly, I expected more.

Placing the three movies in order of merit, I can now rate "Shaun of the Dead" as the weakest with 1 out of 10, "The World's End" gets 3 out of 10, and "Hot Fuzz" is the best of a bad lot with 4 out of 10. Thank God, I will never have to watch any of them again.

"I know all about you - sex for dinner, death for breakfast"

The Family (2013)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Hell Baby (2013)

"An expectant couple who moves into the most haunted house in New Orleans call upon the services of the Vatican's elite exorcism team to save them from a demonic baby. "

Yeah, I know I said I was going to take a break, but I saw that other people had been writing about this movie and decided to upset myself with another crappy one for my final "Torture Tuesday" until after October.

Although the cheap-looking opening slideshow of random American "houses" in various states of disrepair made me want to switch this off immediately, I stuck with it only to discover that it was a typical American comedy, i.e. full of moronic characters (who wouldn't survive in the real world without the aid of professional carers) doing and saying stupid things.

Thus, while the concept of parodying "Rosemary's Baby", "The Amityville Horror", and "The Exorcist" isn't necessarily a bad one, the execution leaves a lot to be desired, and of course, it's not the first time that any of those movies have been spoofed. There's nothing here that hasn't already been done in the "Scary Movie" series apart from a couple of un-politically correct lines.

In its favour, the awkward scenes between Rob Corddry and Keegan Michael Key are nicely done. Their style is a bit of a half-way house between "Airplane" and "The Office", and there's nothing to complain about if you're a fan of that kind of comedy. I prefer more slapstick and cruelty, so "Hell Baby" was just like watching a '90s-style teen-comedy full of tame running gags and puerile "gross out" humour to me. Having said that, I can't fault it for not being more obscene because it's an American comedy after all and can only be judged as such.

The actresses also do a good job being ditzy. It's a toss up between Leslie Bibb and Riki Lindhome for who steals the show as the hottest, but as the latter isn't padded-up to look pregnant and gets completely naked, I think she has the edge. Further eyecandy is provided in a flashback sequence of sexy Italian nurses played by Brittney Alger, Tara Cullen, and Jessica Loyacono.

I wasn't so enamoured by the priests and cops who are aren't skewered enough for their hypocrisy to really offend anyone. There's one jibe about Catholic priests being gay, but it's barely acknowledged, and it should have gone into much darker areas. The cops are simply idiots whose skits continue the "neurons not quite connecting" style. The only thing I got out of any of their interactions is that I now know what a "Po Boy" sandwich is, and I want one.

There's not much horror in this movie apart from a naked 90-year-old woman, one off-camera murder, four kills in total, and the fight scenes with the demonic baby. The production values are decent enough and the effects aren't too bad, but the finale borrows a lot from "Basket Case" (1982) and Cindy's battle with Mr. Kittles in "Scary Movie 2" (2001).

Given that I don't like horror-comedies anyway, I'm still objectively forced to rate this as below average rather than a complete waste of time. I can see how it would amuse some people, but too many punches are pulled and not enough is made of the horror elements for "Hell Baby" to be worth anything more than a curious rental.

54 reasons why Beetlejuice sucks!

Heavily promoted by the blogosphere's Horror Lamers clique as "teh bestest moovee evah", "Beetlejuice" (1988) competes with "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" (1975), "The Addams Family" (1991), "Psycho" (1998), "Shaun of the Dead" (2004), and "Trick 'r Treat" (2007) for the coveted title of my most hated film of all time.

I just can't abide any part of it. Even hearing someone mention the name is enough to get my hackles up, and if they then go on to say that they love the movie, they soon cease to be an associate of mine. I'm not ashamed to say that I've blocked people on Facebook and Twitter because of this piece of crap. If I had my way, all copies of the thing would be rounded-up and burnt on a huge bonfire!

Some would say that I simply have an irrational dislike of "Beetlejuice" based on my equally irrational dislike of all things Tim Burton and Alec Baldwin related, but that's not entirely true. While I freely admit to going out of my way to avoid any Tim Burton or Alec Baldwin movie, I have many good reasons for hating this one—fifty-four of them, in fact—which I now present for you below.

Worst. Movie. Ever.

1. Tim Burton has only directed one good movie in his whole career—"Batman Returns" (1992)—and, obviously, this is not it.

2. "Beetlejuice" was originally meant to be a real horror film, not a crappy comedy. According to the IMDb:

Looking for a project to make after the success of "Pee Wee's Big Adventure," Burton optioned a script by horror author Michael McDowell. Being a horror author, McDowell's script was decidedly non-comedic, and was primarily a horror-thriller with a few minor comic elements. McDowell's story featured no Afterlife sequences, no other ghosts except for the Maitlands, and depicted Beetlejuice as a winged, reptilian demon who co-opted the position of an angel named Swallowtail, who helps ghosts lead peaceful existences while they await entry into their permanent resting places. Beetlejuice's goal is to kill the Deetzes rather than get them out of the house, and once he's dug up by the Maitlands, he cannot be controlled; the idea that he can be summoned and exiled by repeating his name three times was not added to the script until Burton became involved. This Beetlejuice wanders the "living world," assuming a variety of different forms to torment the Deetzes, and in the climax attempts to kill the Deetzes' nine-year-old daughter, Cathy, who was the only person able to see the Maitlands (as opposed to Lydia, who in McDowell's script was a disaffected, sixteen year old punk rocker whom Beetlejuice attempts to rape). The Maitlands then guide Cathy through an exorcism ritual that both allows them to be seen to the Deetzes and banishes Beetlejuice to another realm.

3. The opening credits with corny Danny Elfman "oompah" music will set anybody sane's teeth on edge. You just know that this is going to be a comedy rather than a horror movie, and that horrible sick feeling where bile rises up inside you begins.

4. 2:57 - Animal cruelty! Horrible as spiders are anyway, Adam (Alec Baldwin's character) launches a great-big-hairy-one to certain death by throwing it out of the window instead of carefully taking it outside. "If you want to live and thrive, let a spider run alive!" Predictably, poetic justice soon follows.

5. 3:08 - Geena Davis was hotter than hot back in the day, but her character is dressed like a frumpy 80-year-old! What a terrible waste! No wonder Adam would rather play with his lame little model village than his wife. Yeah, right. It's so unrealistic! If you have something which looks like Geena Davis as a wife, there's no way that she's leaving the bedroom again until she really is 80 years old!

6. 5:18 - Adam listens to the crappiest music in the crappiest way possible. Mono cassette recorder! Ugh! At 19:15, you can see that he owns a much better looking stereo to play his fuzzy warbles on in his office.

7. 7:37 - One of the first rules of driving is that you never swerve to avoid hitting anything. Always brake instead! If the Maitlands had braked and run that nasty little yappy-dog over, the movie could have been all about them trying to make a baby for two weeks instead. Now that would have been worth watching!

8. 9:17 - WTF is up with this green screen crap? Dated much?

9. 9:43 - Apparently, ghosts are like vampires and cast no reflections. Gah!

10. 11.08 - The title of the movie is wrong, as you can clearly see. It's supposed to be "Betelgeuse" just like the star!

Candyman... Candyman... Candyman... whatever.

11. 13:46 - Delia Deetz (Catherine O'Hara) is kinda smokin' hot, but she's married to a cardigan-wearing doofus like Charles (Jeffrey Jones)! In what universe would anything like that really happen? Presumably, the same one where Geena Davis is a model village "widow".

12. 14:41 - Winona Ryder, as emo-kid Lydia, can't act!!! And what's with her Victorian funeral clothes? She's too miserable to be a Goth!

13. 15:12 - Introducing Otho (Glenn Shadix) aka a cheap attempt to milk some homophobic humour out of a camp stereotype in a PG-rated movie! And why does he come in through the window rather than using the front door? Apart from using his awkwardness and size to make him look even more ridiculous, it's never explained.

14. 17:44 - Crappy-looking decapitated head effect followed by a even crappier headless body running around. How is this supposed to be funny apart from being inept?

15. 20:18 - Lousy stop-motion sandworm... on Saturn! But Saturn is classified as a gas giant because it's almost completely made of gas and not sand.

16. 23:00 - Adam can't read or pronounce things properly. Typical Yank! Form your own conclusions for why he makes Betelgeuse sound like a Jewish name.

17. 29:59 - Why is sexy Miss Argentina (Patrice Martinez) green with a pinky-orangey wig and cape? What's she meant to be? Did Captain Kirk diddle her in "Star Trek" or something? She slashed her wrists as a suicide; she didn't suffocate!

18. 33:07 - "I've been feeling a little flat." Really? Is that the best joke anyone could come up with? It's also the only actual joke in this so-called comedy. Hilarious if you're still in infant school.

19. 33.27 - There's no greater accomplishment than ripping off the style of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1920) because you have no imagination of your own, is there? How (un)original.

20. 37:56 - Totally unconvincing stop-motion fly. How feeble is it not to use a real house-fly? Wasteful too. Flies are pretty cheap, and there are lots of them around. The Insect Actors Union will hear about this!

21. 38:17 - "Help me! Help meeee!" Because the target audience of 8-year-olds are likely to be familiar with "The Fly" (1958), aren't they?

22. 40:30 - Oh, how risque! Meh.

23. 41:52 - Because the target audience of 8-year-olds are likely to be familiar with "Night of the Living Dead" (1968) too?

24. 43:32 - Awful incongruous background music.

25. 44:35 - Even more ill-fitting (that means the same as "incongruous", just so you know) background music.

26. 46:03-46:56 - Why is Betelgeuse in a coffin, and why do the Maitlands need to dig him up? What's the point? Shouldn't he just appear when summoned like Candyman? A minute's worth of padding. Gah!

27. 47:46 - More animal cruelty! No need to throw the poor little mousey like that! That's a long drop for a tiny rodent!

28. 48:25 - "I've seen 'The Exorcist' about 167 times..." just like the target audience haven't, but 167 times more than the Horror Lamers have.

29. 48:27 - "And it keeps getting funnier every time I see it!" Exactly what's wrong with today's retarded "yukyukyuk" horror fans who would laugh to see a pudding crawl. "The Exorcist" is certainly not comedy, but now they will think it is because Betelgeuse says so. Ironically, however, it is funnier than "Beetlejuice".

30. 48:41 - Jerk-off gesturing is a bit much for a little kids' comedy, isn't it? I'm no prude, but WTF? Followed by a bit of upskirt perving at 49:00. Again, WTF?

31. 50:22 - The infamous F-bomb is dropped with a honking crotch-grab! Oh dear. Tim Burton really does have no idea who his target audience is meant to be.

32. 50:32 - "He seemed awfully pissed off," as the potty-mouthing continues. Oh, how boundary-pushing! Not. Did Tim Burton help Rob Zombie out with dialogue later?

33. 51:32 - A little bit of homophobia directed at Otho in a particularly unpleasant manner by Beryl (Adelle Lutz). Not even delivered in a joking way. Otho's witty "The Wizard of Oz" referencing comeback is, unfortunately, the most memorable line in the whole movie. Had to be "The Wizard of Oz" too, didn't it? Because we all know who stereotypically loves Judy Garland musicals!

34. 52:34-54:24 - The self-indulgent, incongruent and absolutely cringeworthy lip-syncing musical interlude.



Obviously this occurs for padding and because nobody could think of anything better to put in. On a deeply personal level, I detest this "possession" scene more than any other in any movie ever.

35. 59:46 - Pitiful Betelgeuse-snake stop-motion animation. Almost as bad as something Ray Harryhausen would have done 7 years earlier. So unrealistic.

36. 1:01:37 - "Edgar Allan Poe's daughter". Only a couple of things wrong with that reference and its implications.

37. 1:01:57 - Crappy misquoted "Dirty Harry" line for no laughs whatsoever.

38. 1:02:27 - A whorehouse in a kids' film? Not only age-inappropriate, but in this case, suggestive of necrophilia too. This is a PG! It's not even a PG-13!

39. 1:06:14-1:06:51 - The surreal (and poorly done) stop-motion metamorphoses of the Maitlands into God knows what their heads are supposed to be. Too weird. Too much of what Tim Burton was to become.

40. 1:07:18 - Further proof that Winona Ryder can't act. Exceedingly flat line delivery even for a depressive teenager with Asparagus Syndrome. She has less expression changes than Liv Tyler or Kristen Stewart put together!

41. 1:08:02 - A gross-out cockroach-eating moment. Animal cruelty!

42. 1:08:49 - "...and shit like that..." Oh, who even cares at this point?

43. 1:10:13 - Stupid unconvincing masks. What's the point when Barbara changes back (at 1:10:44) before the Maitlands get chance to use their "fright faces" on their intended victims anyway?

44. 1:14:14 - The whole atmosphere of what could be a chillingly tense seance/conjuring scene is completely ruined by more of Danny Elfman's music overpowering everything.

45. 1:17:37 - The two decaying-corpse ghosts hovering over the dining table could be one of the most horrific images ever... except that it's in a shitty kiddified comedy! Waste!

46. 1:18:46 - Betelgeuse's WTF fairground costume jumps the shark into cartoon land! It makes no sense, it looks stupid, and it's a precursor to everything which will ever become nauseating about Tim Burton's movies. There's surreal and then there's total bollocks, and this is firmly in the latter category!

47. 1:20:07 - Another homophobic joke as Otho's horror at magically being forced to wear an unfashionable '70s leisure suit plays on the stereotype about gay dress sense. Way over the heads of most children, but shame on you, Tim Burton!

48. 1:20:38 - What happened to the snakes which Betelgeuse put into Charles Deetz's hand at 1:20:33? Continuity!!!

49. 1:21:13 - Predictably, Delia's weird-ass sculptures just have to come to stop-motion animated life and join in the craziness. We're now in Tim Burton's whacked-out, arty-farty imagination, and it's not a pleasant place to be.

50. 1:21:45 - What the bloody Hell is that thing which comes through the "Dr. Caligari" doorway? An alien-corpse preacher? A deformed dwarf-corpse with macrocephalus? Whatever Tim Burton was drinking or smoking at the time, I don't want any! This whole scene is far too weird for anybody in their right mind to enjoy.

51. 1:24:17 - Barbara riding a sandworm across time and space to save the day! Well, of course! You couldn't make this shit up! Okay, you could if you couldn't come up with a better ending. Don't forget to laugh at the dated effects. No? Please yourself.

52. 1:24:46 - A happy ending for everyone then, except Maxie (Robert Goulet) and Sarah Dean (Maree Cheatham) who must have had their necks broken when they were violently launched through the ceiling at 1:19:24.

53. Another cringeworthy lip-syncing routine at the end.



54. If you add up all of Michael Keaton's time on screen, the title character only has 17 out of 92 minutes! That really sucks!


So there you have it. "Beetlejuice" isn't horror. It's not even a proper horror-comedy. It's not scary, it's not funny. It's embarrassing, dated, and cringeworthy, but it's definitely not funny.

What audience is this really meant for? It's a PG with normally R-rated language, adult situations, sexual innuendoes, animal cruelty, homophobia, a smidgen of (debatable) racism, attempted paedophilia, suicide, images of death and the dead, and so much cigarette smoking that it's almost an advertisement for the tobacco industry!

How the Hell did the MPAA pass "Beetljuice" as a PG when something like "The Conjuring" (2013)—which is clearly a PG-13—gets an R? If this isn't proof that the MPAA is corrupt, it's still food for thought, eh?

Is "Beetlejuice" something that 'ickle kids should watch? Based on the damage that it's done to the minds of the tasteless plebs in the Horror Lamers clique, I don't think so. It's not because of the rating though, it's just because the movie totally sucks.

Bad Milo (2013)

"A horror comedy centred on a guy who learns that his unusual stomach problems are being caused by a demon living in his intestines."

If you've ever wondered what would happen if you mixed "Office Space" (1999) with "Basket Case" (1982), "Bad Milo", the latest horror-comedy coming to VOD services in a couple of weeks' time from Magnet Releasing ("the genre arm of Magnolia Pictures"), is the answer. According to their official website, "Bad Milo" will also be released theatrically on October 4th, but I'd hazard a guess that it'll be limited.

As usual, some unscrupulous screener-monkey has already uploaded "Bad Milo" to the streaming sites. I would moan about how it's about time that distributors stopped giving out screeners willy-nilly to all these lame horror bloggers who either just want freebies or to upload the movie illegally—especially as I've never asked them for anything myself—but as it's only from Magnet Releasing (who kept following and then unfollowing me on Twitter every 2 days until I blocked them), and I hate horror-comedies, I couldn't care less. "Bad Milo" isn't something which I would have gone out of my way to watch otherwise.

It's not that "Bad Milo" is badly made or anything—in fact, it has very good production values for a low-budget comedy full of puerile toilet humour—but it's a one-trick pony. Once the "hilarious" joke about a demon that lives in a guy's ass has been beaten to death (almost literally!), this predictable crap has very little to offer other than remixing scenes and elements from more famous movies in ways which frequently cross the line between homage and blatant ripoff.

As you can see in the picture below, Milo the ass-demon looks a lot like Baby Sinclair from the kids' TV show "Dinosaurs" (1991). He also has the big-eyed cuteness and a few other characteristics of Gizmo the Mogwai from "Gremlins" (1984). Writer/director Jacob Vaughan's influences are extremely obvious, especially his homages to the more evil gremlins, "Ghoulies" (1985), and Belial from "Basket Case". Basically, the horror parts are a throwback to all the little creature/puppet movies of the '80s, and consequently, "Bad Milo" brings nothing new to the table here whatsoever.

Everybody Loves Milo.

Clearly, "Bad Milo" is a product of the same creatively bankrupt culture which allows these so-called comedies and parodies to elude prosecution for copyright infringement, and it begs the question of how much is really "fair use" before someone starts throwing the word "plagiarism" around? When you can so easily identify the "borrowings" from other movies, how is that not theft? At the very least, it's extremely lazy filmmaking. If Mike Judge, Joe Dante, Frank Henenlotter, and Charles Band gave Jacob Vaughan their permission to "re-imagine" their movies then forget I said anything, but I highly doubt that such a thing ever happened.

Apart from casually noticing that the lead, Ken Marino, is channelling Ray Romano and Zach Braff at the same time (which may just be his normal acting style for all I know), it's pretty obvious to me that the situational comedy of "Office Space" forms the core of this movie. There's the slimy boss (in this case played by Patrick Warburton), firing/leaving interview scenes, embezzlement, retribution, and all the poetic justice of "Office Space", plus... wait for it... Stephen Root aka Milton "Stapler" Waddams is in this too!!!

Since I'm considered such a pariah by modern filmmakers and the distribution companies that I had to watch the "Bad Milo" screener semi-legally, the irony of the whole situation isn't wasted on me, but I'm still going to call this movie out for its lack of originality even though I haven't been swindled out of anything other than my wasted time. Needless to say, I didn't find any of it particularly funny.

The scenes with Peter Stomare (Satan from "Constantine") playing the new age therapist/witchdoctor Highsmith are mildly amusing, and I thoroughly enjoyed ogling Gillian Jacobs who plays Ken's sexy wife Sarah. Other than that, you can shove "Bad Milo" up your ass!

Unlucky Charms (2013)

"Five girls vie for a chance to model diva Deedee DeVille's fashion line, but they're soon competing for their lives against four mythical beings, led by the mischievous Farr Darrig."

Going from the sublime to the ridiculous, this typical Full Moon production with a shorter than average running time of 70 minutes (including drawn-out opening titles and end credits) isn't something which I was too eager to watch, but I'm glad I did just so that I could dismiss it as an updated version of "Spellcaster" (1988).

I'm sure that Charles Band is quite familiar with "Spellcaster" since his very own Empire Pictures produced and distributed it (and he is named as Executive Producer at the beginning!), but that's all that really needs to be said about that film. Apart from starring Bunty Bailey (the girl in A-Ha's "Take on Me" video) and having Adam Ant in a small role at the end, it's not exactly memorable. The subject matter of both movies is clearly similar but not identical, and even if it was, nobody cares. It's hardly a crime to clone your own products.

Without such "cloning", we wouldn't have a dozen installments of the "Puppetmaster" series, or the spin-offs which aren't much different. Charles Band is obviously not the only producer/director to do this either. Everyone from Bill Zebub to Roger Corman has frugally rehashed the same plots, dialogue, and ensemble casts in their z-grade "B movies", and I'm not going to condemn any of them for it. Hell, there are no new stories to be told anyway, so all any filmmaker can do is update the actors and locations.

Numbers 1, 3, and 4 please... in that order.

"Unlucky Charms" is only a quick satire which showcases some models/actresses, their boobs, and some cheap-looking effects anyway. It's not a serious horror movie by any stretch of the imagination, nor is it meant to be, but it's what Full Moon fans generally like. I'm still not sure which side of the fence I sit on when it comes to Full Moon. Some Full Moon movies have been very good, but most have been absolutely terrible. If pressed on the matter, I prefer the "Trancers" series, followed by "Subspecies", but I don't really care for any of their most recent titles.

Maybe the new Full Moon has become yet another hipster thing which I'm too old, jaded, and grumpy to buy into. I noticed a lot of people on Twitter talking about "Unlucky Charms" who I would never classify as "horror fans", so Full Moon must be doing something right for them. Ironic comedy will only take you so far though if the overall quality isn't there. Sadly, I've switched more Full Moon movies off through boredom than I've completed, but I did make it all the way through this one. How and why exactly, I don't know. Perhaps it was the boobs.

Although I can say that Seth Peterson is very good as Pirl, Nathan Phillips is competent as the leprechaun Farr Darrig, and beautiful Nikki Leigh is my favourite out of the models, I wasn't so enamoured by the rest of the cast or what they had to work with. It's not that anybody is absolutely horrible in their roles, but they aren't great either. Of course, nobody has to be pitch-perfect in a B movie, but it makes things far more entertaining if the cast can "do a bit" rather than just play dress-up... or take-your-dress-off, as the case may be.

"Unlucky Charms" looks good, has an okay-ish story, and it's quick enough over the ground to not be boring. It's just not very original, and if the moral of the tale is that looks aren't everything, it shoots itself in the foot with its own self-criticism.

Thus, while the plot may be amusing to anyone who loathes TV contest shows such as "America's Next Top Model" and would love to see those narcissistic bimbos destroyed by various creatures from Irish folklore, "Unlucky Charms" didn't do much for me. Give or take some magic, a few supernatural entities, and a sleazy MTV-style VJ, I really have seen it all before.

Only saying...

Hatchet III (2013)

"A search and recovery team heads into the haunted swamp to pick up the pieces and Marybeth learns the secret to ending the voodoo curse that has left Victor Crowley haunting and terrorizing Honey Island Swamp for decades."

Gore, gore, gore, gore, gore, and even more gore! Yes, "Hatchet III" delivers what everyone has been craving for a very long time!

Three years after the instantly forgettable "Hatchet II", where Adam Green failed, BJ McDonnell's debut as a director breathes new life into a series which most of us had written off. Having said that, this is still Adam Green's baby and, unfortunately, there are places where it shows.

The thing is, you shouldn't be able to go wrong with a slasher film anyway. All you need is a group of people and a monster with supernatural strength to hack them to pieces in the most painful-looking and bloodiest ways possible. Who cares if "Hatchet III" has a thin and formulaic plot? The practical effects are absolutely lush with brutal dismemberments and blood gushing everywhere.

Where the previous "Hatchet" movies went wrong is that they had too much humour and none of it was funny. "Hatchet III" isn't perfect either although the balance is much better this time. It's still meant to be a "fun movie" rather than something to be taken seriously, but at least it is actually fun rather than a chore to sit through.

This is not a SyFy channel movie!

Not to spoil the big surprises for you, but all the usual convention circuit suspects apart from Tony Todd appear again. As Victor Crowley, Kane Hodder proves that he can still do a lot more than sign his autograph, which is nice.

Zach Galligan makes a decent attempt at playing a sheriff, Parry Shen turns up as a paramedic primarily to deliver an anti-racism jibe, and Derek Mears adds the visual in-joke of two former Jasons fighting it out for anyone who cares about remakes. The confrontation between Hodder and Mears could also be taken as "Victor Crowley is better than the new Jason" which, in this case, he really is. In many ways, "Hatchet III" is what the "Friday the 13th" remake should have been.

Even the acting is better this time although I doubt that the target audience of teenagers and "Friday the 13th" nostalgists will notice or care about such subleties. I noticed, particularly in the case of Danielle Harris whose scenes would lag if she wasn't so good in them, and I'm grateful for it.

Now approaching middle-age, Danielle Harris looks really good in this movie too apart from showing her huge, disfiguring tattoos in a hosing-down/shower scene which would be moderately erotic otherwise. At first, I thought she had some terrible wound inflicted on her by Victor Crowley, but then I realised what she'd done and it threw me right out of lust with her. What a shame. I'm sure she'll recover though.

Probably best if you keep your tracksuit on in future, babe.

I'm not going to go into further detail because I know that you'll want to see "Hatchet III" for yourself. I highly recommend that you do so as soon as possible before the usual negativity hits whatever message boards and Facebook pages you're subscribed to. "Hatchet III" is easily this Summer's best horror movie no matter what the "negative Nancies" might have to say about it.

It's taken three attempts, but we finally have a "Hatchet" movie which lives up to the original's tagline of "Old School American Horror". The third time really is the charm.

Ooga Booga (2013)

"Ooga Booga follows an innocent African-American boy who is brutally murdered by dirty cops, but his soul is magically transferred into an action figure named Ooga Booga. With his tribal spear and old girlfriend to help, he takes to the streets and trailer parks to find the men that ended his once bright future."

Having seen Ooga Booga's other appearances in "Doll Graveyard" (2005) and "Evil Bong" (2005), I was intrigued by what Charles Band had in store for us with a full length feature starring the puppet. I also wanted to see if Karen Black and Stacy Keach could still act since I haven't seen them in anything horror related for ages, but that's another story. It's been a long time since "Trilogy of Terror" (1975) or "Body Bags" (1993) which are, respectively, their most famous genre performances.

I know that I have a reputation for being all about the serious horror movies rather than the comedies, but before everyone jumps on the "You're a hypocrite!" bandwagon, I do watch other subgenres occasionally either by accident or just to see what's happening. I may be a hypocrite in some situations (like everyone else), but I'm not as bad as certain sycophantic "big name" websites or virtually deceased hillbilly podcasts. This isn't a popularity contest for me so if I choose to watch something silly rather than horror from time to time, that's my business which I'm now making yours for the sake of a blog post.

Anyway, with no idea what kind of entertainment I was going to derive from "Ooga Booga", I gave the Redbox kiosk my custom, made yet another pizza, and settled down for something a bit more uplifting than all the usual death... or so I thought. There's actually still a little bit of murder and bloodshed in "Ooga Booga".

Although the cynic in me is inclined to believe that the whole movie is a giant advertisment to sell replicas of the "Badass Dolls" because they're undeniably cool, "Ooga Booga" has a few genuinely funny moments in spite of itself. Unfortunately, the pacing is slow and the jokes are very far between.

Nobody does a particularly bad job, and the Ooga Booga doll is cute enough to steal the show in every scene even if he's only blinking, but everything feels sparse. The movie isn't short of racist insults, but many punches are pulled by the lack of real vehemence behind them which would make everything more offensive, controversial and memorable.

The main gag is, obviously, the homage to Karen Black's fight with a Zuni fetish doll in "Trilogy of Terror", but it doesn't have any impact even with the same actress in it. Making a parody out of something that was already unintentionally funny is a misplaced step too far in the "meta" direction, and it falls flat. The motivation of the Zuni fetish doll is completely different to Ooga Booga's revenge for one thing.

I must admit that I was expecting (and hoping for) "Ooga Booga" to be a lot more racist and un-politically correct than it turned out to be. While the racist epithets and imagery abound, the fun is really poked at the white stereotypes more than cashing-in on the "blaxploitation" angle. As such, I'm not really sure what to make of what I watched.

The bottom line is that "Ooga Booga" is neither pro-Black or pro-White even if the characters are one way or another. As a bit of cheap "filler" entertainment which lasts less than 90 minutes and only costs a dollar, there's nothing much to gain or lose from the experience.

Warm Bodies (2013)

"After R (a highly unusual zombie) saves Julie from an attack, the two form a relationship that sets in motion a sequence of events that might transform the entire lifeless world."

"Warm Bodies" feels like an unofficial sequel to George A. Romero's "Land of the Dead" (2005) but toned-down to a PG-13 rating for the "Twilight" crowd using a similarly romantic story. Apparently, it's based on a book by Isaac Marion. I probably don't need to tell you that I've never read it and probably never will do either.

Essentially, it's another "Romeo and Juliet" designed to cash in on the last dregs of the zombie craze which has already gone way beyond annoying. On the plus side, "Warm Bodies" is quite decently made and enjoyable enough to watch. The slow pace and teenage comedy will put a lot of people off this one though. Once again, it's not really a horror movie.

Everybody will be comparing "Warm Bodies" to "Twilight" so I might as well get those aspects out of the way. Yes, the lead zombie is English just like Robert Pattinson and even looks a bit like him from some angles. His name, "R", could even be an homage to Robert Pattinson if you are dumb enough to not push it all the way to it's Shakespearean predecessor. The girl is, by necessity, Julie in case you still don't get it. And just like "Romeo and Juliet", "Twilight", and every other love story, they fancy each other but can't be together because they are from different worlds... blah, blah, blah. I can't really complain about "Warm Bodies" too much given my status as one of the few "Twilight-friendly" horror bloggers, but I didn't really get a lot out of it.

Nicholas Hoult (Tony from "Skins") and Teresa Palmer (Vanessa from "The Grudge 2") are okay in their roles. There's nothing special to report about them one way or another. They look the part except that they are both too old to play teenagers now. I'm not sure if they are meant to be teenagers really though. I was going to bitch about them mumbling enough to be teenagers, but I now think that's intentional.

Rob Corddry as "M" (which turns out to stand for Marcus not Mercutio) has the best lines, but isn't very memorable. I have no idea what he's been in before although I'd guess it was a lot of TV shows along with the rest of the cast. Again, there's nothing wrong with his performance. It is what it is.

Hipsters who have never seen any other films starring John Malkovich will love that he is also in this for a couple of phoned-in minutes as Julie's father. He's a bit miscast and would be more appropriate as Julie's grandfather given his age, but then it wouldn't be so obviously a "Romeo and Juliet" knock-off as intended.

Ultimately, it's nice to see that Jonathan Levine has directed something again after "All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" (2006), but "Warm Bodies" is a bit bland and very predictable. It looks nice, the "boney" zombies might scare small children, yet it's not an exciting "zombie gorefest" by any stretch of the imagination.

A Haunted House (2013)

"Malcolm and Kisha move into their dream home, but soon learn a demon also resides there. When Kisha becomes possessed, Malcolm - determined to keep his sex life on track - turns to a priest, a psychic, and a team of ghost-busters for help."

Apart from Marlon Wayans, I've never heard of anybody in "A Haunted House". Actually, that's not entirely true. I also recognised David Koechner but couldn't place or name him until I looked him up on the IMDb. For those of you who also wonder, he was in "Final Destination 5" and "Snakes on a Plane' (which, ironically, is referred to later on).

Not knowing the cast of a theatrical movie is sometimes not a bad thing depending on the subject matter. As long as it's a real movie, you can assume that the actors have been in TV shows or other movies rather than being complete unknowns who don't know what they are doing. If this had been a straight-to-DVD movie, different rules would apply. When you haven't heard of anybody in a backyard "indie horror", for instance, it's definitely a huge warning sign that it will be a bad one.

Having said that, I wasn't expecting a lot from "A Haunted House" either. I hate horror-comedies with a passion, and I've never found any parodies which hit their targets successfully apart from the first "Airplane". I always give every movie a chance to entertain me (otherwise I wouldn't watch them), but I knew the chances would be very slim that I would get anything out of this one.

With great trepidation, I ventured into the uncharted territory of "A Haunted House", and it soon became obvious that all my suspicions were correct. While the parodies of the first three "Paranormal Activity" movies, "The Entity" and "The Exorcist" are almost perfect, none of them are funny.

Maybe it's because the "black American culture" references which are uncomfortably forced in are clichéd and outdated, or maybe it's just because the comic timing and delivery is off, but apart from the dog getting killed at the beginning (and its drawn out aftermath), I didn't crack a smile at anything else once. Dogs disgust me so put it down (no pun intended) to my own callousness that made me grin.

I liked how the various effects were copied so well from the parodied movies. I also recognised every scene including the quick nods to "Insidious", "The Blair Witch Project" and "[REC]". The thing is, I didn't think they were amusing even with all the sex jokes and toilet humour thrown on top of them. I'm no prude, it's just that such humour is feeble and too puerile in ways that only a tame American movie can truly make a mess of them. Ouside of stand-up comedians, American comedy doesn't travel well anyway.

The bottom line is "A Haunted House" looks the part, Essence Atkins is very talented as Kisha (especially when acting possessed), but the "comedy" is a waste of 80 minutes which you'll never get back.

Excision (2012)

"A disturbed and delusional high school student with aspirations of a career in medicine goes to extremes to earn the approval of her controlling mother."

Starring AnnaLynne McCord (from "Nip/Tuck"), Roger Bart (from "Desperate Housewives"), Ariel Winter (from "One Missed Call"), Traci Lords, Malcolm McDowell, and Matthew Gray Gubler (the guy with the exceedingly long neck from "Criminal Minds"), "Excision" isn't really a horror movie, but I was asked to take a look at it and briefly review it for somebody on another site that I occasionally hang out on.

If you like slow-moving, offbeat, highschool/coming of age dramas with lots of blood and gore in dream sequences then "Excision" will make you very happy indeed. There are bucket loads of blood in this, several mouthfuls of vomit, and some particularly revolting teenage acne. Even herpes makes a guest appearance. For me, however, "Excision" seems to take all day to get to the point. Apart from the practical effects, I'm not overly impressed by any of it.

The acting is fine, there are no problems with the camerawork or any of the other production values, but for obvious reasons, "Excision" looks and feels just like an episode of "Nip/Tuck", "American Horror Story" or "Desperate Housewives". It tries to be all sexy, controversial and outrageous, but just like on TV, many punches are pulled, and it's far too long despite the running time being only an hour and 20 minutes.

The main problem with any "horror" movie which isn't really a horror movie until the very end is how much is put in to prepare you for the final reveal. In this case, "Excision" shows all the gory bits right from the very beginning, and this ruins the shock value of the ending. Even for the squeamish, this technique is anaesthetising and predictable.

Although it's still quite insane, less dark comedy and an even more "out of left field" punchline could have turned "Excision" into a really good story instead of a cult wannabe. The same thing almost happens with "Teeth" except that the similar vibe and over-extended gag plays out better. It's definitely not a good idea to watch the two back-to-back if you are looking for originality.

As a quick cash grab, there are the usual suspects involved in this including Malcolm McDowell phoning-in another performance as a snarky British maths teacher. Traci Lords does a nice impersonation of Bree from "Desperate Housewives" while, ironically, Roger Bart is slightly more endearing than usual. I can't really fault Roger Bart in anything except "Hostel 2" though. Unfortunately, not one member of the cast is outstanding because "Excision" spends too much time lingering over the gloriously bloody effects rather than the superficial characterisation. There's simply nobody in this to care about.

I absolutely loathed AnnaLynne McCord when she played Eden in "Nip/Tuck" and was extremely happy when she was written out. Pauline, her character in "Excision", is equally vile, distancing, and unsympathetic plus she looks sicker than her onscreen sister (Ariel Winter) who is supposed to have cystic fibrosis. As soon as I saw her "ugly" make-up and fake pimples, I had no interest in seeing any more of her. Apart from showing some skin, she's very "TV" acting-wise and just isn't convincing as an angsty teenager now either.

I wish I had something more positive to say about "Excision" because there's definitely something good underneath. The trouble is that it has to struggle so much to be seen through the mediocre execution of everything else. If you are less critical than me, you will probably love it in spite of the flaws.

I'm rating "Excision" as below average. Numerically, I'd give it a 4 out of 10 if I was still doing things that way. It's a good idea, entertaining enough, nicely produced, but too quirky, far-fetched and unsatisfying. At the end of the day, "Excision" is Richard Bates Jr.'s directorial debut. He had four years to develop this from his short of the same name, but I won't hold that against him.

Why I couldn't care less about "Ghostbusters 3"

The only scary bit in "Ghostbusters" (1984) was the librarian scene, so who the Hell cares about another lame comedy-horror movie anyway?

Well, it seems all the horror movie news sites do because they've been reporting the non-event of "Ghostbusters 3" for years even though it's still no nearer to becoming a real project.

The latest thing is the big question of whether Bill Murray will be in "Ghostbusters 3" or not. Having cringed through his cameo in "Zombieland" (2009), I couldn't care less about ever seeing him onscreen again.

It's been years since any of the cast were big enough names to sell a movie, and it's debatable whether they ever were. What have they done since which was worth a damn?

Harold Ramis hasn't done anything worthwhile, and although Annie Potts and Ernie Hudson have both been working consistently, none of the original cast have ever achieved the level of fame and success which "Ghostbusters" gave them for one Summer.

What was the last thing Dan Akroyd did that anyone remembers? For me, it where he was a reflection in the mirror in "Casper" (1995). That was when "Ghostbusters 3" should have been made not 17 or 18 years later!

As for Sigourney Weaver, she was just in "Vamps" (2012), but her career is on the wane now or she wouldn't be doing such tripe for an easy paycheck. What a waste.

"Ghostbusters 3" has the potential to be either another instantly forgettable second sequel or a bad taste in the mouths of those who were the right age to appreciate "Ghostbusters" when it first came out. It's a no-win situation.

If it ever happens, "Ghostbusters 3" will be like "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls", the second "Star Wars" trilogy, "Rocky Balboa", or any of the other resurrected franchises which should have stayed dead. It will suck!


Ten Reasons Why "Ghostbusters 3" Will Suck!

1. It's been too long since "Ghostbusters 2".

2. "Ghostbusters 2" (1989) also sucked.

3. Bill Murray is unlikely to be in it although the news reports keep changing about whether or not he will be.

4. Rick Moranis definitely won't be in it because he's retired.

5. It's a comedy.

6. It's a comedy for little kids and the parents of little kids.

7. The original audience has long since moved on. It's no longer the '80s and what was amusing back then is embarrassing now.

8. Allegedly, the script has been written by the same people who write the American version of "The Office" which also isn't funny.

9. Nobody in their right mind wants to invest in this.

10. It's a film designed to cash in on the nostalgia of parents and will only ruin fond memories of two movies which weren't that great in the first place.