Prom Night II (1987)

"When Hamilton High's Prom Queen of 1957, Mary Lou Maloney is killed by her jilted boyfriend, she comes back for revenge 30 years later."

Only three days left until Hallowe'en? October has flown by for everyone who writes a daily horror blog although it's tiring work watching all these old movies again instead of being spoiled by new ones. Yes, I tell my cats how tiring it is every time we are all snuggled up together in front of a great horror film just how exhausting it is. I don't think they believe me, and nor should you.

I imagine that it's boring reading about the same things from everyone because I've noticed right across the board that hardly anyone is getting any comments and the pageviews are surprisingly low. Don't worry, it's nearly over. Next month, there are going to be a lot of changes on my blog including a higher ratio of articles to reviews. I've known for a long time that horror movie review blogs are old hat now, but I may still surprise you with a few dips back into "The Vault" for as long as I have any good films left to talk about.

Anyway, "Prom Night II" is yet another Canadian clone of better American movies which I used to think was very good indeed. I'm not so sure about it anymore even though it's easily the best of the "Prom Night" series.

Although it was originally released a couple of weeks too late for Hallowe'en in 1987, "Prom Night II" is yet another supernatural horror movie which suits the season perfectly. There's even a big plastic pumpkin sitting on a shelf in the school basement at around 19 minutes in.

I have no idea when "proms" actually happen in America or Canada since we don't have them in Britain (occasionally there's a disco at the end of term), but I assume that they are a Springtime event or something which happens after graduation rather than in October when everyone is going back to school. Whatever the case, they are a good setting for lots of teenager shenanigans and the focus of far too many '80s movies.

What makes "Prom Night II" stand out more than the rest is the abundance of so many hot girls all at the same time. While most people rave about Lisa Schrage as Mary Lou Maloney, she doesn't have a lot of time on screen, and she's not actually the prettiest. My favourite is Beth Gondek who plays Jess. She's the girl with the big hair and bad dress sense who is almost guillotined then gets hanged and thrown out of a window before she has chance to shine.

Beverley Hendry is also extremely good-looking and almost perfect in her role as Monica apart from being a little bit too old for the part. Think Charisma Carpenter in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and you'll get the idea. Actually, I don't think any of the actors are really teenagers, but I may be wrong about that. The most memorable is Terri Hawkes as Kelly, the wannabe prom queen, who is desperate to win that fleeting and totally worthless moment of popularity at any price. She's more "cute" than sexy, but she definitely shows more acting ability than her peers.

Surprisingly, the one girl I don't find attractive in "Prom Night II" is Wendy Lyon who plays the lead. The song by The Monks called "Nice Legs Shame About Her Face" is cruel but very fitting. As Vicki Carpenter, Wendy Lyon plays the part as a rather plain blonde who likes frizzy, permed hair and nail polish but doesn't like make-up. Her face really screams for make-up though, and it's a pity that YouTube hadn't been invented at the time or she would have learned a lot from the viral Jenna Marbles comedy video.

Vicki Carpenter is half Carrie White and half Andie Walsh from "Pretty in Pink" (1986) but not as cute or as likeable as either of them. Even when she gets completely nude for five minutes or so in the middle of the film, she just doesn't do it for me. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.

I've been giving plot points away so I might as well just summarise the story completely by saying that "Prom Night II" is, basically, a fusion of "Carrie" (1976), "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (1984) and "The Exorcist" (1973). In fact, the latter even gets referenced in the dialogue in a "meta" moment which seems out of place in anything other than a comedy. The more I think about it though, there's a possibility that "Prom Night II" might be a very dark comedy which doesn't really work. It certainly reeks of John Hughes-style characters even down to a far too good-looking computer nerd played by Brock Simpson (the only actor to appear in all four "Prom Night" movies) who has all the best lines.

The disappointing ending is actually worse than "A Nightmare on Elm Street", "Friday the 13th" and "Phantasm II" which all share the same "now you think they're safe but they aren't" twist. If it hadn't been for such formulaic pandering, "Prom Night II" probably wouldn't have bombed at the box office when it came out. Stuff like that just spoils any emotional investment which you've put in so be advised that you really need to switch the movie off before Michael Ironside gets the kids into the car at the end.

Oh yes, I almost forgot to mention that Michael Ironside is in this too. He's okay, but there's just not enough of him due to having to share his part with a younger actor, Steve Atkinson, who is made-up with a cheek scar to look just like him in the flashbacks. Out of the two Billy Nordhams, the younger one is the more interesting.

I recommend "Prom Night II", but it's one of those movies where you really had to be there at the time it came out to fully appreciate it. Some of the effects are dated now, there are two dream sequences which confuse matters and slightly spoil the flow of the story, and it's not scary. If you are into the '80s and nostalgia, it's still rather entertaining.

Amityville 1992: It's About Time (1992)

"Jacob Sterling brings home a mysterious clock from the infamous Amityville house, not knowing that it's haunted by demonic spirits."

This is one of the three straight-to-video Amityville horror movies which I still don't own on DVD and never will because they are all so crap. It's hard to believe that this was from the director of "Hellbound: Hellraiser 2" or that the screenplay was based on a book by the author of "The Amityville Horror Part II".

In fact, if I hadn't found this full movie accidentally on YouTube (above), I would most certainly have never watched it again not even to write a review for this blog. There are some absolutely terrible movies which, in my own little world, simply do not exist because they are so awful and this counts as at least two of them.

There are no good reasons to watch "Amityville 1992" unless you are that hard up to see some middle-aged boobies. Even they are only in shot for a few seconds. As attractive as the owner of those boobies, former Miss Carolina Shawn (yes, it's a girl's name here apparently) Weatherly, may be, the only actress you really want to see get nudie is Megan Ward and she keeps everything covered up.

Honest to God, it's more trouble than it's worth to endure this lacklustre and confusing tale about a possessed clock (which messes around with some family relationships for no reason whatsoever) just to be cheated out of the fun stuff which was thrown in as one of the most annoying teases in the whole Amityville franchise.

Yes, there are a couple of extremely bloody scenes, a load of black goop, and a teenage boy with raging hormones who ends up being melted and sucked down a drain, but all these things sound way better than they actually are. Seeing a microphone being lifted out of shot on at least three occasions is more interesting.

With hardly any atmosphere, no chemistry between the actors, characters so one-dimensional that they barely register, this is a film that should have been all about the jump scares, but there aren't any of those either. The only good scenes are with Peaches, the dog, and even those are below average.

There's no motivation for any of the stuff which happens to be happening, none of the relationships between the characters make any sense, and it's just a complete mess with an ending which will leave you none the wiser.

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

"A loan officer who evicts an old woman from her home finds herself the recipient of a supernatural curse. Desperate, she turns to a seer to try and save her soul, while evil forces work to push her to a breaking point."

I was going through a stack of DVDs (which I am about to throw out) earlier today when I discovered that I had an ex-rental copy of "Drag Me to Hell" among them. I realised that I hadn't even reviewed this film yet so I'll do it now as quickly as I can.

"Drag Me to Hell" marked Sam Raimi's long awaited return to directing horror after all those increasingly weaker "Spider-man" movies which really shouldn't interest any of us at all. Although Raimi had been the producer of several horror movies in the last ten years, including "The Grudge" (2004) and "30 Days of Night" (2007), he hadn't actually directed anything in the horror genre since "The Gift" (2000) and that barely qualifies.

Of course, everybody knows Sam Raimi's name because of "The Evil Dead" (1981) and its sequel (or more comedic remake) "Evil Dead II" (1987). With such groundbreaking films as those to his credit, everyone was expecting something quite special. Unfortunately, "Drag Me to Hell" was a polarising experience among horror fans with many of the director's former supporters boycotting the theatrical release of the movie because of its PG-13 rating. Those who did go to see it, came away disappointed because of the overuse of extremely loud music and jump scares.

Having watched both the theatrical release and the "Unrated Director's Cut", I obviously prefer the latter even though it's a bit like saying that I would rather eat my own vomit instead of somebody else's. The clichés are simply too many and the acting too uneven for this to be a good film even though it is still watchable if you keep adjusting the volume.

One of the biggest problems for me (apart from an obvious one that I'll mention in a minute) was that I couldn't empathise with Alison Lohman's character at all. I'm not the biggest fan of banks with their excessive charges anyway but the kind of person that Christine Brown was supposed to be really made me lose interest in her quite quickly. At times I felt like I was watching a horror version of "Clueless" or "Legally Blonde" although both those films are far more entertaining.

Then, of course, there was the sacrifice of one of the sweetest little kittens that I've ever seen in a film. Although it mostly occurred off camera, the corpse was shown and an animatronic version appeared again later.

Basically, any film which involves an animal death makes me angry even if it is necessary to the plot or highlights the extremes to which somebody would go to save their own soul. I was so disgusted by this that there was absolutely no way that I could feel anything for Christine Brown afterwards and, as I said, I wasn't really all that into her to begin with. When the inevitable and predictable end came with all its CGI, I was glad.

I am not going to recommend "Drag Me to Hell" due to the horrific and unnecessary kitten murder which ruined the whole experience. If you've ever seen "Thinner" (1996) or any adaptation of M.R. James' "Casting the Runes" such as "Night of the Demon" (1957), you'll feel like you've already seen all the good bits of "Drag Me to Hell" anyway.

And Now the Screaming Starts! (1973)

"England 1795: the young Catherine just married Charles Fengriffen and moves into his castle. She becomes victim of an old curse that lays on the family. On her wedding night she's raped by a ghost and gets pregnant."

The IMDb description of this Amicus horror really gives away everything that you need to know about the plot apart from how slowly the story unfolds.

Due to being filmed at Oakley Court, "And Now the Screaming Starts!" looks like a slightly cheaper version of a Hammer film. Starring quite a few Hammer regulars and being directed by Roy Ward Baker adds to this illusion which, of course, was the intention. On a purely personal level, I've never really liked the majority of Milton Subotsky's productions from the '70s although the Amicus anthologies do have occasional moments of brilliance. I can't quite put my finger on why, especially whenever Amicus tried to do a single story, their movies always came second best to Hammer but I'd hazard a guess that it was mainly due to trying to make them more contemporary that, ironically, dated them all really badly.

I think Amicus must have realised at the time that the period settings were what gave Hammer their edge and you can tell from "And Now the Screaming Starts!" that a lot of work went into trying to create a similar atmosphere. If only as much effort had been put into the script as the costume and set design then this would have been an instant classic. It's bloody gruesome in places, particularly the opening scene (which appears to be lifted from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "Hound of the Baskervilles"), and has the potential to leave a bad taste in your mouth if you think about it too much.

If there's one thing that angers me, it's the British class system and all the feudalism that it's been built on. The curse that gets put upon the Fengriffen family really is more than justifiable in my own mind and, no pun intended due to the later subject matter, I really have to hand it to Herbert Lom for making me hate the aristocracy even more than I already do. It's probably not a good digression but every time I see this particular opening rape scene, all I can think about is how corporate America with the "fire at will" laws (and other nonsense) are doing exactly the same thing in the 21st century as medieval Britain once did. Make no mistake about it, too many companies think they own their employees even when they aren't working for them and try to take away every constitutional right that they think they have. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine the over-privileged "Lord of the Manor" coming round to rape your wife and cut off your hand even today and if you just substitute "Lord" for "Corporate America" and its potential to take away everything and destroy your life according to a whim then the possibly unintentional social commentary of "And Now the Screaming Starts!" still has some power to it.

Of course, even though Henry Fengriffen's acts were illegal back in the day, you can be sure that such things (and even worse) have happened in the history of every country when the aristocracy have abused their position. I doubt that David Case's gothic novel "Fengriffen: A Chilling Tale" (which "And Now the Screaming Starts!" is based on) made much more of any of this other than a plot device for the ensuing horror story and I haven't ever read it to say for certain. Obviously, the weakness in using such a horrible, unnecessary and polarising act to set the stage for the later action is that most people are on the side of the victim and want justice to be done. None of the later generation of Fengriffens really matter from that point on.

Therein lies the biggest problem with "And Now the Screaming Starts!". There is no way that a logically thinking audience cares one iota about what happens to Ian Ogilvy and Stephanie Beacham's characters other than wanting very bad things to happen to them. There are no innocents when it comes to aristos and there is never any point when you can sympathise with their predicament.

Stephanie Beacham was an incredibly beautiful babe when she was younger (and wasn't too bad when she was a big star in a lot of high-budget '80s soaps either) and, it's possible to argue that her character, Catherine Fengriffen, is an innocent victim. I disagree. Yes, Catherine Fengriffen does all the fainting and screaming when it suits her but her reaction to her own rape is so typically upper class and dismissive that it's impossible to feel any sympathy for her. Her husband, Charles Fengriffen, is such an equally arrogant piece of work that, as much as I liked Ian Ogilvy in "The Return of the Saint" TV series, I absolutely hated him in this.

Now you might think that a film that causes such negative emotions as this would doom it to failure but actually that makes it rather good in my book. If a drama doesn't cause an emotional response from the viewer then it can be written off but "And Now the Screaming Starts!" actually tries its hardest to anger its audience on every level. Unfortunately, as a horror movie it's supposed to be scary too but none of that really works.

The special effects vary from average to ridiculous especially the severed hand crawling around and the whole thing is quite unevenly paced. Some scenes drag while the more interesting ones get rushed and, on a purely horror entertainment level, none of it is particularly satisfying.

I suppose I should mention Peter Cushing as psychiatrist Dr. Pope but only because there is nothing out of the ordinary with his performance apart from it being quite anachronistic. Patrick Magee as Dr. Whittle is much more believable but the man gives me the creeps in every film that I've ever seen him in whether he's playing a good guy or otherwise. I think his best role was in the "Blind Alleys" segment of "Tales from the Crypt" (1972) though I'm sure he will always be most remembered for playing the crippled writer Mr. Alexander in Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange" (1971).

Anyway, there's not really much more to say about "And Now the Screaming Starts!" other than it having quite a predictable ghost story underneath it all. I think the intention was to make something completely original and different but it didn't quite happen. As a gothic horror story, it lacks tension and, as an exploitation movie, it lacks all the gratuitous (and not so gratuitous) nudity which really would have livened things up.

I'm moving "And Now the Screaming Starts!" from The Vault to the "Just Average" section but it's still a recommendation. "And Now the Screaming Starts!" is not Amicus' best work but it's different enough from everything else they did to stand out as an anomaly. If you like ghost stories, you'll probably like this but if you want real hardcore grisly horror then you'll be very disappointed.