FROZEN

NOOOOO!!!

Well ain't that heartbreaking...

DVD REVIEW: ROGER CORMAN'S HORROR CLASSICS VOL. 1

 

It's easy to sift through the producing career of Roger Corman and wonder why anyone gives a hootenanny about the man who brought us some of the most ridiculously titled, conceptualized, and realized films of all time. But dig a little deeper. Start doing some clicking. Start realizing he was the one to give some of Hollywood's biggest names their first break. You want actors? Try Jack Nicholson or Sylvester Stallone. Directors? Perhaps you've heard of Martin Scorsese, Ron Howard, Jonathan Demme, or Joe Dante. And believe me, this list keeps going. A man known for releasing decades upon decades of schlock has proven himself to be an invaluable asset for struggling filmmakers - a conduit between the oblivion of the obscure and the world of the mainstream. 

Everyone has their favorite Corman flick. If I had to pick mine, it would be a toss-up between the original versions of Death Race 2000 and Piranha. There is an undeniable power to these and many of his other films. As Wes Craven once said, some filmmakers have the power to scare you, but there are some other filmmakers that feel "dangerous" to audiences, and who can't be entirely trusted to stop at that line between acceptable cinematic horror and beyond it. Roger Corman has the power to infuse his own directorial body of work with that feeling of danger, as well as finding other filmmakers to find that same line and obliterate it. 

Three films comprise Roger Corman's Horror Classics: Vol 1: A Bucket of Blood and The Terror, directed by Corman, and Dementia 13, directed by a young Frances Ford Coppola. Yes, of The Godfather trilogy, Apocalypse Now, and The Conversation. For the first time ever on home video, each film has been digitally remastered. Who'd've thought such films made on the cheap could look so fantastic?

Or at least varying degrees of fantastic. Given their age and original budgets, only so much could have been done. A Bucket of Blood might look the best, due in part to its original black and white format. Except for a few artifacts and mild blemishes, it looks pretty good. And watching Dick Miller in a rare leading role about a coffee shop busboy slowly losing his mind as he desires to become a heralded artistic genius is always a fun time.

Dementia 13 might be the selling point of this set, if only because of the man behind the camera: Frances Ford Coppola. One of his earliest efforts is about a woman who covers up the death of her husband by getting rid of his body, only to find herself forced to mingle with members of his family in an effort to keep up the illusion that he's just fine. (For the inheritance, you see.) One of these family members turns out to be fairly crazy, and they have an ax to prove it. Dementia 13 looks a little muddy at spots, but then quickly alternates to looking pretty smooth. Overall it looks great; a victim of multiple public domain video releases by distributors looking for a quick buck on a recognizable title, it might be at its best looking here.

The Terror, never a favorite Corman flick of mine, probably yields the least impressive results. Quite possibly another public domain titles for many years, it's one that's never appeared anywhere with a laudable transfer. I'd wager that while this is probably the best it's ever looked, it's not going to knock your socks off, either.

If you're one of the lucky few who's just had a spiritual awakening and realized the horror genre is your thing, and if you've heard the name of Roger Corman and want to start there, this recently released collection by Film Chest is your perfect prerequisite. A collection that shows off the traits for which Corman would become famous - gothic horror and morbid humor - awaits you with Roger Corman's Horror Classics: Vol 1.

Buy.

WOMAN IN THE WINDOW

The image is said to bear an eerie resemblance of Frances Grimshaw, who worked at the guesthouse and stood for hours at the same window taking bookings.

David Grimshaw, a former resident at the property, said he was convinced the figure is the ghost of his mother, who died nearly a year ago aged 87.

He believes her spirit may have appeared to protest at the demolition of Meadowbank House, which she adored.

"That is my mother. I'm totally convinced – no one else looks like that. She had glasses and big earrings and she used to wear a dress with a bow at the front," he said.

"She used to stand in that room for hours on the phone – it was the guesthouse reception and she took bookings from there.”

Mr Grimshaw, 59, a managing director, who now lives in Bedford, said: "She would have been horrified if she had known the house was being demolished because it was beautiful, so maybe that is why she's turned up."

Demolition supervisor Robert Johnson, 38, of Heysham, took the photograph of the house shortly before it was knocked down, earlier this week but it was only later that he noticed the ghostly figure.

"It wasn't until I got home and showed my wife that we spotted the woman," he said.

"You can see the jewellery on her and everything. I've always been a sceptic but I'll have to believe in ghosts now."

Colleague Stuart Shan, 34, from Blackburn, Lancashire, said: "The day before we took the photo we were stripping the building inside and I noticed the chandelier swinging on its own.

"We said at the time the place felt strange. My hairs were standing on end when I saw the photo. I believe it is a ghost."

Dave Armstrong, of Kendal contractors Cox and Allen, said the five-gabled building, which was originally a dentist's in the early 1900s, has been taken down to be replaced with a new commercial property.

He said he could not explain the image of the woman. "There was only a black wall behind the window, we had taken everything out – there were no visible features or anything with a skin colour."

IF IT WERE STINE

And my personal favorite:

But really, I love all of these.

Check out the rest. Well done, tumblr-runners.

DEAD ISLAND LIVE

REVIEW: TO JENNIFER

The line between art and "hey, let's make a movie because we can!" is becoming increasingly blurred. Eduardo Sanchez and Daniel Myrick bought a couple cameras, made The Blair Witch Project, and then made back most of their production budget by returning the cameras for a refund. The film cost them around a handful of Mercedes to produce and made back its budget 300 times. Several years later, Chris Kentis and Laura Lau bought a couple digital cameras, rented a boat, and shot Open Water without the support of a major studio. Unknown actors got in the water with real sharks for hours upon hours, and the filmmaking duo edited the film on their home computer. It was another box office smash. And it continued the new trend of do-it-yourself filmmaking began by the likes of Kevin Smith, Richard Linklater, and that damn Burkitsville witch. It proved if you had the materials and talent, you didn't need a major studio's resources or funding. 

In theory, this is great. The unachievable dream has become that much more achievable. The one-in-a-million chance for success tested and subjugated by a Michigan nerd who loved horror movies and made Evil Dead (and who currently rules Hollywood) is now the stuff of history.

Which brings us to a little film called To Jennifer, shot entirely on the iPhone 5 - a large part of the marketing platform. If it's the first time ever, I honestly don't know - but by film's end, it wouldn't have mattered if it were shot with the eye of God. 

Your main character is Joey (Chuck Pappas). His girlfriend is cheating on him, or so he thinks. So he decides to make a video about catching her in the act, so he can give it to her. I'm...not sure why. Along for the ride is his cousin (and cameraman), Steve (James Cullen Bressack, also writer/director), and their mutual friend Martin (Jody Barton). Their video diary takes them across multiple states, a failed plane ride, a couple ugly confrontations, and the inevitable and obvious twist ending.

To Jennifer is every scene from The Goonies when all the kids shout over each other, loudly, and without mercy, only now that yelling is crammed with testosterone, profanity, and behavior that would make most people severely uncomfortable, but instead makes everyone giggle. 

Because the film is shot on a phone, any attempt at direction is, at best, limited, and at worst, non-existent. There's only so much you can do to lend the film any kind of style. Due to this, the rather no-frills production will instead have to depend on the intrigue of the story and the power of its cast.

Speaking of, most of the cast does a fine job, at least at first. Pappas as Joey depends on your sympathy as he is your lead with a lot of baggage. He is the cuckolded boy of the story and should already have at least our attention, being that we've likely all been in his shoes and we know how much it blows. As the film progresses he veers into dangerous overacting territory, but being that his character is supposed to be on a somewhat downward spiral, it's not a detriment to the film. 

Continuing on, major fucking props goes to fucking Cullen Bressack as Steve, who tries his fucking best to be as fucking obnoxious as possible, rattling the audio with his fucking bawdy laughter and his over-the-top "I'm a party animal!" demeanor. Count how how many fucking times he can cram "fuck" into his dialogue - astrophysicists can't count that high - while simultaneously being completely fucking unlikable. Watch as Joey sadly confesses that his girlfriend is cheating on him as Steve laughs. Watch as Joey has a nervous breakdown on a plane as Steve laughs. Watch as Joey lays in a hospital bed as Steve laughs. Watch as Joey gets his ass handed to him at a party as Steve laughs. Watch as Joey is clearly becoming more and more mentally unbalanced over the course of his descent as Steve laughs - hard and squeakily.

To Jennifer has an interesting concept - a sort of road movie where friends could bond and help one of their own get over a sad development - but this is a double-edged sword, because all you're seeing is a bunch of college kids hanging out and doing what college kids do: drink, smoke pot, go to parties, talk about mackin' wit girls, etc. An approach like To Jennifer should be as realistic as possible, I admit that, but it shouldn't be so realistically mundane that I begin to wonder why I'm watching these random videos on that iPhone I found at the bus stop.

But hey, what do I know? To Jennifer's Facebook page is covered in positive reviews. Perhaps other folks are seeing what I'm not. Perhaps I'm prejudiced against this next stage in filmmaking where all you need to make a film and have it distributed nationally is a cell phone. Perhaps I'm embittered because no one wants to give Don Coscarelli a few measly million to make Phantasm V, or that no one wants to fund any of John Carpenter's potential projects - you know, the man whose entire filmography is being remade and dumbed down in nearly their original order of release, to the "benefit" of the audience whose target age is decreasing year by year.

To Jennifer really could have been that next step in proving that a successful end result could be shot with something as simple as that thing in our pockets we used to use strictly for making phone calls. To Jennifer has a beginning, middle, end, actors, and makes use of available light quite handily. If your film is location heavy, intimate, and okay with the raw digital look, then this DIY approach really could be your new best friend if you're a filmmaker with a great concept and little money.

Sadly, To Jennifer seems more to be the result of kids who made a movie because they had a camera, rather than an original idea strong enough to withstand and complement its gimmick.