DAY THREE: RECOMMENDED VIEWING – THE CURSE OF FRANK BLACK

 

I am huge fan of "The X Files." Yes, I agree the show stayed on the air for far too long, not to mention The X Files: I Want to Believe should have been a lot better than it was. But I will always and forever remain a fan (and never give up hope on a third/final movie.) I bring this up because once "The X Files" had established itself as a television force to be reckoned with during its mid-‘90s, its creator, Chris Carter, was able to use his new it boy status to create another show for the Fox channel. This show was called "Millennium." It was very unfortunately short lived, lasting only three seasons, and already starting to lose its way midway through season two. But the first season of "Millennium" remains superior to any season of "The X Files," and that’s really saying something.

For those unaware (and most non-horror devotees seem to be so), "Millennium" was a one-hour drama starring Lance Henriksen as a serial killer profiler working for the mysterious Millennium Group. Billed more psychological thriller than supernatural, the first season was fairly straightforward. It was about a man named Frank Black who used his exceptional abilities of getting inside a killer’s mind (figuratively, not literally) to try and obtain the motives behind his/her crimes and the reasoning behind it. It was a surprisingly dark show for a network that at the time was known basically for screwball comedy, including "The Simpsons" and "Mad TV." While "Millennium" was a slam-dunk with critics, garnering Lance Henriksen three Emmy nominations for his performances in all three seasons, the audience simply wasn’t there. Because of this, behind-the-scenes pressure (assumed pressure, anyway) forced Chris Carter to allow the show to lean more toward the supernatural in hopes of attracting the massive audience who tuned in weekly for "The X Files."  It was this direction change that became the catalyst for "Millennium" sadly losing its way.

Season two of the show is great, but as it unfolds you can see it threatening to come off the rails. Lance Henriksen’s devotion to the role remains unfettered, and season two produced more than its fair share of great episodes.

Including this recommended viewing for Halloween night: Episode 2x6.

“The Curse of Frank Black.”

The episode aired on Halloween night back in the dark ages of 1997, and the episode itself takes place on said night.

Frank, now separated from his wife, Catherine, sits at home carving a jack-o-lantern and waiting for the right time to go pick up his daughter, Jordan, to take her trick-or-treating.  Suddenly his electronics begin to go haywire, and the number “268” routinely pops up seemingly everywhere. Frank recognizes that it’s odd, but leaves to go pick up his daughter…and sees the Devil outside his home.

And his nightmarish, unending Halloween night of terror begins.

Frank spends the episode forced to reacquaint himself with ghosts from his past—ranging from his childhood to even as recently as the events of the previous season (not even a year in the "Millennium" timeline).

In a long flashback sequence, Frank recalls his chance meeting with Mr. Crocell (Dean Winters, best known for his comedic roles on "30 Rock" and as “Mayhem” in the Allstate commercials), a very scarred WWII veteran on whose door young Frank knocks while trick or treating with friends. You see, Mr. Crocell, though young, had obtained the reputation of being “the creepy old guy” who lived in a ramshackle house and almost never showed his face. He was thought to be insane, a killer, or live in a haunted house. And it was because of a Halloween dare that young Frank knocked on his door. Later on in this flashback sequence, Frank, now a teen, watches as Mr. Crocell is removed from his home in a body bag after having taken his own life.

Back in the present, Frank finds himself back in his old neighborhood, where he had once lived happily with his wife and daughter. He enters his old house, now uninhabited, and eavesdrops on a bunch of thrill-seeking teens as one of them talks about “the Curse of Frank Black,” and about the death of Frank’s good friend, Bletcher, who died in that same house at the hands of a reoccurring villain through the show's run.

Frank is nearly dismayed to hear that, in the same way Mr. Crocell had been the one painted as the crazy, old man during his youth, it would now seem, according to these kids, that he was the one who had taken up that mantle. Frank was now the crazy, old man. And he’s not happy about that—he’s not willing to accept his new status as the lonely, mysterious, and perhaps dangerous member of the neighborhood. In the same way he doesn’t want his family tarnished by the dangerous work he involves himself in, he doesn’t want his reputation tarnished by neighborhood gossip. And not in an egotist way, but in a way where he feels they are one in the same. Whether all in his mind, or in a walking nightmare come to life during the power of Halloween night, Mr. Crocell tells Frank that the life Crocell lived is the life Frank is risking living himself if he does not give up his work and focus on his family.

"The Curse of Frank Black" is probably the creepiest "Millennium" episode there is. The setting of Halloween night (including its dark, windy, and foggy weather) helps to make it extra creepy.  It’s the type of night we Halloween enthusiasts wish for every year. When I was a kid and begged for candy, then yeah, I preferred Halloween to be nice, sunny, and warm enough so I didn’t freeze to death. But now, as an adult (kind of), I want my Halloween nights to be windy, leaf-strewn, and creepy. And this episode certainly satisfies that requirement.

Director Ralph Hemecker, mostly a veteran of television shows like "The X Files," "Numbers," and "Blue Bloods," manages to infuse a lot of creepy imagery and ideas into this episode. And he manages to use the image of the Devil, probably one of the most over-used images in horror history, to extreme effect, giving you faraway, split-second, “did I just see that?” shots of the fork-tailed beast from below.

For non-fans of the series, the episode is still a very effective watch. No, you won’t understand all the references and the ins and outs, but for its mood, tone, and imagery alone, it’s a more than worthy Halloween night watch.

Plus, it’s only about 40 minutes without commercials. What have you got to lose?

DAY TWO: TRICK-R-TREAT

"You don't really know much about Halloween... You thought no further than the strange custom of having your children wear masks and go out begging for candy."

DAY ONE: 31 DAYS OF HALLOWEEN

 

October is here. It always seems to take forever every year, doesn't it? The summers tend to hang around way too long, and the autumns before it, while here, are fleeting. But this big giant world of ours keeps spinning, and another October has been delivered to us. I'd like to celebrate it for as long as possible, before the final minutes of October 31st rear their head and tease the remaining eleven months where things don't seem quite so special.

And so begins "31 Days of Halloween." Be sure to check back with me each day for a Halloween related post. From not-so-traditional Halloween movie recommendations, to books you should definitely be checking out, to original fiction by yours truly, to even a couple Shitty Flick entries; every day will be its own entity - its own mini celebration of the most misunderstood day of the year.

Get ready...

REVIEW: BACK FROM HELL (EX INFERNIS)

Synopsis
Six friends decide to spend their holiday together and rent a manor house in the countryside where they can leave behind the madness of city life. Once there, they befriend a priest, Father Elia, who lives alone in the adjoining church. Very soon the party mood turns frightening, as strange phenomena, apparently paranormal, begin happening around the group. It soon turns into a nightmare when one of the friends, Giorgio, begins acting as if he is possessed, which the group interprets as being demonic.

While Alessandro, his best friend, tries to find a scientific and rational explanation to the happenings, the other friends appeal to Father Elia for assistance. He feels Giorgio is surely possessed by the devil and tries to exorcise him. But in the end what is happening is beyond their ability to understand and, moreover, their possibility to control. Is Giorgio’s possession the sign of a larger, even more diabolical phenomenon about to envelop the world?

Review

It's difficult to review films that leave you with neither a positive nor negative reaction. It's just as easy to throw heaps of love to a film that works as it is to trash a movie that doesn't. But then there are movies like Back From Hell (formerly known as Ex Infernis) that aren't offensive enough to warrant any kind of laundry list of ways it could've been better, nor is there much of it worth pointing out and complimenting.

But I can try.

First off, that synopsis above, which I pulled from a piece of sales art during the film's festival run, is a little misleading. The friends aren't renting a house, but have accompanied Sara, an architect, who has been contacted about visiting an old monastery to see about its potential for restoration. The structure is very beautiful, old age or not, and the high ceilings and tall doors help it to become a character almost effortlessly.

The interaction amongst the friends never feels forced or scripted. And thankfully the actors playing them, all whose first language is clearly Italian, speak English well enough that it doesn't hinder any of their performances. (I bring that up because foreign productions find English-speaking actors in order to give the film more international appeal, which oftentimes can prove distracting.) There's only one weak actor among the cast, and he spends most of his time behind the camera remaining quiet. Giovanni Guidelli is especially good as Father Elias, whose haunted eyes make you sympathize with the poor, isolated priest who seems to know shit's ready to hit the fan even before the audience does.

Making a possession movie is always going to automatically draw comparisons to The Exorcist. It's unavoidable. Because of this, part of me wants to commend director Leonardo Araneo for avoiding over-the-top special effects or sound editing to make the possessed actually appear possessed. The possession comes only from the abilities of the actor to appear so, intended to make it appear as realistic as possible. In theory, this is a good choice. After all, look at Jennifer Carpenter's performance in The Exorcism of Emily Rose. Despite how you might feel about that particular film, her performance as the possessed Emily is creepy and effective, and was accomplished not with special effects, but with the abilities that Carpenter possessed. However, in the case of Back From Hell, this decision creates a problem: It never seems cinematic. And because this is cinema, we need more than an evil smile and some drool.

There are interesting ideas festering within Back From Hell, one especially being that Giorgio goes on record during a heated debate in the first act that God doesn't exist (and through an odd defense of his own beliefs, might even insinuate he is a Scientologist). It is Sara with whom he argues, and her beliefs in God are unwavering, leaving the argument to become quite intense. I bring this up because, from what I have read about possession, those with faith are the ones more susceptible to possession than those without it. If this was a purposeful choice, I'd be curious to know why. Or perhaps it was supposed to be that "irony" thing I've heard so much about.

At times the film's plot feels almost improvised, or cobbled together from footage three times as long as the final running time. There's an unfocused feeling of meandering, as if there was less of a script but more of an outline. "We need to get from Point A to Point B, but we can just wing whatever happens in between," etc. Because of this, it's sometimes difficult to pinpoint exactly what is happening or how scared we should be. (Based on the final output, not much.)

Back From Hell is sometimes effective in that way found footage movies are effective by default: A character walks down a dark hallway shining a flashlight in certain rooms, and suddenly there is someone - or something - standing before them. Moments like these are always startling because that's how we as human beings react to something unexpected. So in that regard, Back From Hell provides a few easy scares.

One of the more disturbing subplots features Sara's unborn baby. To spoil this would be to spoil the most shocking moment in the film, so I will refrain. One thing I will say about it is...it's not something I was at all expecting.

Look, could you do a lot worse than Back From Hell? Yes, you sure could. And anything in The Asylum's catalog would prove that almost instantly. Could you do a lot better, too? Yes, you could. But if you consider yourself a fan of the found footage technique, it's worth taking a look; it's low on scares, but high on concept and ideas. 

Oh, and by the way, don't expect anything remotely similar to what you see on the poster to occur during the film. 

EVIL DEAD: AN ANIMATED TRIBUTE

Published on Jun 19, 2012 by DanielKanemoto

For more information, visit www.exmortisfilms.com.

Follow the evil that roams through the dark bowers of man's domain in this balls-to-the-wall animated tribute to the sights, sounds and unforgettable characters of Sam Raimi's iconic EVIL DEAD trilogy!

This is my cinematic love letter to three influential movies that made me want to be a filmmaker: EVIL DEAD, EVIL DEAD 2, and ARMY OF DARKNESS.

I created all the artwork in the sequence, but the final image is directly inspired by an incredible EVIL DEAD poster created by Olly Moss. The moment I saw it, I only wanted to see it move -- which is how I feel about all great posters. The new wave of artists working with Mondo have made movie posters worth collecting again, and that's a great thing. I hope to someday join their ranks.

And I can't wait to see the new EVIL DEAD remake. My studio specializes in title sequences, and I want the opening credits for this new journey to the cabin to be just as frightening and original as the film they introduce. (I would not-so-secretly love a chance to pitch my take, and if that's even close to possible, I'm open for business at www.exmortisfilms.com.)

Special thanks to the cast and crew of the EVIL DEAD trilogy, Jeff Yorkes (who found me a print of that sold-out-in-an-instant Olly Moss poster), and Joe Pleiman, the most talented sound designer in the world.

CREDITS

Directed, Drawn, & Animated By Daniel M. Kanemoto | www.exmortisfilms.com
Inspired By A Mondo Poster Created By Olly Moss | www.ollymoss.com | www.mondotees.com
Sound Design By Joe Pleiman | www.joepleiman.com
Music By Joseph LoDuca | www.loducamusic.com

IT'S IN THE BLOOD

After watching this striking trailer (which I don't do, ever, because trailers ruin everything), this has shot to the top of my most anticipated list. Wasn't sure what to think at first because though I love Lance Henriksen, his need for "alimony movies" seemed to take over the majority of his career for the last decade. This, however, looks fantastic.

REVIEW: SINISTER

Within the first ten seconds of Sinister, I knew I was seeing something fresh, new, exciting, and creepy. And within that first ten seconds, I knew I would love it.

When Sinister was announced as far back as May of 2011, I began keeping an eye on any developments almost immediately because of the director attached to the project: Scott Derrickson. While he’s not a household name, at that point he had already given us the extremely undervalued The Exorcism of Emily Rose and the unfairly maligned Hellraiser: Inferno (my personal favorite entry in the Hellraiser franchise, even though it was never meant to be a Pinhead movie, anyway). I don’t really blame him for the completely inept remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still, being that it was a Fox Studio movie, and as many know, they are a studio that can’t keep their grubby mitts off their larger, tent pole films.

Developments on Sinister began rolling in, using the terms “found footage” and “true crime.” Being that I’m a found footage nut ball, this sounded only but good to me. Then Ethan Hawke was announced for the project, and I was completely confused.

“Why are they casting such a big name celebrity for a found footage movie?,” etc.

Now that I’ve seen the film, and know how the found footage is incorporated, it all makes perfect sense.

Ethan Hawke plays true-crime writer Ellison Oswald, who rose to prominence and fame with his book Kentucky Murder, written ten years prior to the events of Sinister. His prominence and exposure came when his book made known the fact that law enforcement had dropped the ball in a number of places while investigating during whatever murderous crimes that took place (they’re kept purposely vague), and Ellison’s book brought to light a lot of information that had been left behind. This is all well and good, and resulted in a bestselling book and a tidy little sum of money for the author and his family. However, there’s a blemish on Ellison’s career called Cold Denver Morning, another true-crime tome that unfortunately got some things wrong and allowed a murderer to walk free of his crimes.

Ellison moves his family, unbeknownst to them, into a Pennsylvania house where the previous family had been hung from a tree in the back yard. He hopes to investigate the unsolved murders and write the book of his career –  one that will erase all his past indiscretions and award him with all the fame and fortune he claims not to desire.

After discovering a box of super 8 films marked “home movies” up in the attic, Ellison begins going through them one by one, and what he sees before him are mere moments of idealized familial happiness and togetherness before the films jump cut and see those very same families being killed in some gruesome or intricate way. They aren’t just shot or stabbed – they’re tied to lounge chairs and pulled one by one into a swimming pool, or they're bound and gagged and pushed into a car filled with full cans of gasoline, only to burn alive. What’s important to note is this murderous footage features not only the family who had previously lived in Ellison’s new house, but other families from other houses from all across the country – and all involving one member of the family, a child, going missing soon after. The footage is genuinely unnerving, made all the more so by the very unorthodox musical choices of such avant garde/ambient musical groups like Accurst and Ulver, while Christopher Young, goddamn legend that he is, scores the more traditionally shot portions of the film.

Though Ellison tries as best as he can to isolate his family from his creepy discoveries, his son's previously conquered night terrors begin happening again with much more intensity, and his daughter begins to draw on her bedroom wall images featured in his ghastly filmstrips.

As Ellison investigates each murder, he begins to slowly realize that he’s not just dealing with terrible murders, but something much more than that…something beyond that boundary he never thought he would cross…something supernatural.

Something named Bughuul.

Blumhouse Productions, who produced Sinister, is quickly becoming a best friend to the horror community, having produced the Paranormal Activity trilogy (make that quadrilogy), Insidious, and the television series "The River." Blumhouse et al. and director Derrickson (along with first-time writer C. Robert Cargill, who knocked this out of the park for his first time out) work well together, and all seem to be on the very same page in terms of realizing this project and bringing it to the forefront. Sinister plays out very much like a kindred spirit to Insidious, with a heavy focus on quiet horror mixed with legitimately creepy imagery, non-melodic music, even down to a monstrous face appearing in every filmstrip Ellison watches.  It contains the perfect balance of quiet terror, disturbing images, and comic relief (which we end up relying on to take a breather from the mounting terror that befalls Ellison every night when the antiquated projector in his locked-up office kicks on by itself…)

What works in Sinister’s favor is that it’s a very simple and very contained story. There are only six people featured prominently in the movie (alive, anyway) and the action hardly ever leaves the Oswald family’s new home. And as for the story being simple, that’s not a slight against the film. Some of our best horror films – Halloween, Psycho – had simple stories, and because Sinister's filmmakers didn’t feel bogged down with having to provide exposition, this allowed them to create sequences to unnerve the audience.

It goes without saying that Sinister is Derrickon's best effort as a director. Watching the film gives you a feeling he's achieved a new way of approaching his material, and it's one that also feels the most unrestrained. It feels as if he was given nearly carte blanche to make this film the way he intended without a studio looking over his shoulder.

Sinister also features a strong supporting cast, featuring Juliet Rylance as Ellison’s wife, Vincent D’Onofrio as a local university professor (featured only in a Skype video chat), James Ransome as Deputy So-and-So (see the movie and you’ll understand), and even Fred Thompson as the town’s grizzled sheriff.

Horror needs more movies like Sinister. It needs high-concept and original ideas that are only out to scare audiences in the purest ways – with images, mood, music, and good story telling. I can only hope that Sinister sees success at the box office when it opens in a wider release on October 12th – not so it can be sequalized, but so once again, like Insidious and the PA films before it, studios can see that low-budgeted original horror fare can and will be successful, so long as you give it a chance.