Horror Movie A Day: From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money

Robert Rodriguez is a huge fan boy. Every time he release a film he promises at least a trilogy full of sequels. Whether we want them or not, We got El Mariachi Trilogy, Spy Kids, From Dusk Till Dawn and even Sin City is in the works.  I’m still waiting for his promised The Faculty sequels. I don’t think he’s short on ideas, there’s plenty of good scripts in Hollywood, he just wants to see all his projects come to fruition. Like any good fan boy eh watches a movie comes out and dreams up what’s next, except he’s in a position to make those “what's next dreams” happen.

I remember being completely excited at the thought of the From Dusk Till Dawn Sequels. Quentin was going to write one and Robert was going to direct it, and Robert was going to write one for Quentin to direct. That never came to pass. Instead we got the first sequel, three years later, direct-to-video, from Director Scott Spiegel, who’s never done anything interesting before or since.  Even though you can tell that Robert Rodriguez storyboarded most of this, the film still felt very static, sadly due to Spiegel simple style. 

The box art seems very promising, the T-1000 Vs. Vampires.  And that big Mexican dude who was in the first one. But sadly he was in it even less than Bruce Campbell. Who had a small cameo with Tiffany Amber Thiesen.  Their three minute cameo takes place at the very beginning. Check it out below.

 

The movie centers around Robert Patrick getting together a crew to rob a Mexican bank full of Gringo drug money. The only time the movie refers to the eponymous Texas Blood Money is in a phone cal. A nice twist would have been the Gringo drug dealers to show up and defend their money alongside the police. But the movie is never that smart, it’s clever title refers only to the blood sucking vampires that attack Robert Patrick's crew. Much like the original film, good guys and bad guys have to get together to ward of the vampires. That's pretty much the only connection to the original, that and a throwaway reference to the Gecko Brothers and a short visit to the Titty Twister bar that was the site of the first film.

The movie isn’t all bad. It’s actually quite fun. I’m of the mindset if a horror movie can't have a decent story or acting, then it should just throw everything else on the wall and see what sticks. It can be bloody and gory but above else it should be fun. This movie plays well, you don’t need to invest a lot to enjoy it. It can easily play in the background if you want to do something else. It has a few good scares and tense moments at the beginning. But when it becomes a heist movie, it stops being scary, and becomes borderline ridiculous, but still enjoyable. It’s taken me ten years to sit down and actually watch this film, partly because it was much maligned by critics, and I didn’t want to ruin the first one by watching a poorly made sequel.  I doubt I’ll be remembering much of this beyond Bruce Campbell’s cameo, but it did have some good ideas behind it that might have been better used in the first film. There was an eclipse that allowed the Vampires to come out in the day, the bat cam, and the very unique bite cam and the brim of the hat cam, not to mention lots of great camera placement, all due to Robert Rodriguez no doubt, and while the dialogue wasn't so interesting it did have some colorful character actors to spout them, which made it bearable. For a boring Sunday afternoon, it sure helped pass the time.

I’ll never watch it again. But I’m not sorry I did. I recommend this to fans of the original, it doesn’t taint it in anyway,

I give it 2 and a half big Mexicans.

Horror Movie A Day: Salem’s Lot

Today’s selection is the 1979 miniseries, Salem’s Lot, based on the novel by Stephen King, starring Hutch from Starsky and Hutch. A lot of people my age and younger are familiar with the 112 minute quick-paced international cut. It was the one shown on cable and released on VHS home video. I only wish I had been watching that version. This version sits pretty at the 3 Hour Mark. Back in 1979 with Commercials it ran for four hours, split into two nights. That probably would have been easier to take. But to watch this in one sitting is a chore. Nothing terrifying starts to happen until the 50 minute mark.  You’re probably saying to yourself, well Stephen King novels tend to be wordy and full of exposition, they need extra time to flesh out the story. If that we’re the case, I’d be right there with you. But it’s not, they never really touch on any of the other themes in the novel, they stick to vampires here and your usual horror movie shenanigans. You got the doomsayer warning everyone and your usual cast of non believer’s making him feel stupid for scene after grueling scene.

The movie begins with two men in South American church. They’re refilling their vials of holy water and believe that they have been discovered. The movie flashes back to 2 years earlier, in the small town of Jerusalem’s Lot. A couple of newcomers have arrived. A pair of antique dealers, Straker and Barlow, that have the town abuzz with the new shop they are getting ready to open, and Ben Mears (played by David Soul aka Hutch) author and former resident of Salem’s Lot. He has returned to write a book about the town’s haunted house that struck a chord with him when he was a child. A house that is currently being leased by Straker and Barlow.

Children begin to disappear and others are having nightmares, and waking up tired and weakened. Many are rushed to the hospital with cases of anemia. It quickly  becomes apparent that the town has a Vampire that is infecting the resident’s who are in turn attacking their own families and friends.  Mears believes he has been drawn back to Salem’s Lot and the house to release the town from it’s evil grip. He is joined by his former schoolteacher, the local town Doctor and a young teen into Famous Monsters and the occult. They quickly discover that Barstow, the silent partner in the antique business, is behind it all and Straker is his henchman.  The film ends exactly where it begins, in a church in South America, with Hutch and the monster geek on the run from Vampires. I think this premise would have made for a great series, Hutch and the Monster Geek Vs. The Vampires.

This movie isn’t all that terrible. When the frights do come, they are still shocking 30 years later. No surprising since the director Tobe Hooper (Poltergeist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre) knows quite a thing or two about  supernatural horror flicks. In a scene where Barstow enters a family’s living room, their furniture starts to move about and shake, it's very reminiscent of Poltergeist.

The head villain Kurt Barstow is a little silly as a Nosferatu clone. And his final scene is a bit anticlimactic. But you really wouldn’t expect a human to go head to toe with an ancient vampire. Unless she’s the chosen one.

But they let Straker (played by James Mason) do all the talking for him anyways. And he’s a great creepy old English bastard. A Super powered old English Bastard. He’s the only one that actually puts up a fight in the end. The film also pulls no punches, people who would live in other horror films, don’t make the cut here, They make victims and Vampires out of small children and babies!

If this was your little brother floating out the window, would you let him in?

This creepy scene with the boy floating outside the second floor window, like a possessed Peter Pan, whimsically enticing his brother to let him in will probably stick in my head for a little while. I’m reminded of the scene it inspired in the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie, where Luke Perry's friend is begging to be let inside, and Luke Perry tells him to go home. The friend begs to be let in again cause he’s hungry, and once again Luke Perry denies him and says ”Dude, You're floating! C'mon, man”

Overall this film is worthy of a viewing. For Stephen King and Vampire fans I definitely recommend it. If you can find the shorter version, I recommend it even moreso. As it stands I give it Two and a Half Stakes through the Heart.

Horror Movie a Day: Son Of Dracula

Not to be outdone by his whiny little sister, Dracula’s male offspring decides to get his own movie deal with the 1943 film Son Of Dracula. He’s trying to escape his families dark past, so he decided to immigrate to America, and change his name to Count Alucard. Yes, Alucard is Dracula spelled backwards. We’ve seen it countless of times before, But this movie marks the first time its ever been done. He’s played by the great Lon Chaney, jr. who uses this role to be the only actor to get a full house in classic Universal Monsters. He played the Wolfman, Frankenstein’s Monster, Dracula, and a mummy.

Sadly though he is completely miscast here. Lon Chaney is just a big dumb American oaf type of guy. He’s got a simple down home charm. To have him play the charming and dark Count Dracula, or one of his offspring, is an insult to the audience.  He’s often referred to as a foreigner by the characters in the film. The only thing foreign about him is the silly ass mustache he wore to make himself look distinguished.

Don’t get me wrong. I didn’t hate the film. In fact quite the opposite. It’s the best and probably most under appreciated of the Dracula Trilogy. Surely Lugosi’s Dracula is missed here. But this movie isn’t bound to a plot derived from historical or literary world. Dracula just doesn’t bumble into town to seek out new victims. Well actually he does, but its part of a plan hatched between him Katherine Caldwell.  At first the audience is fooled into believing Alucard is the evil mastermind behind everything and is attempting a shortened version of a long con to acquire new property. He’s seduced a rich heiress into marriage and he is now the new Master Of The Dark Oaks plantation. There’s will be a murder, a reading of a will and a few double crosses before it’s all done. Even the count himself is double-crossed, which at that the point the film’s kicking into second gear. It’s no Usual Suspects, But you do get Keyser Soze’d.

Aside from the first usage of Alucard, this flick has the first Bat to Vampire on-screen transformation. Prior to this we’ve always just seen a cheesy bat float around on a string and then the Vampire enters the scene. In fact the film boasts quite a few good special effects, a decent mechanical bat, some nice floating effects and smoke the forms into the shape of a man before transforming into Lon Chaney, Jr.  Impressive even today. Oh and the count’s sole off-screen vampire victim, is a small child. Even though we don’t get to see the attack, we do see the aftermath, something beyond the standard of decency when the first film came out in 1931.  

If you’ve already seen Dracula, and the Dracula’s Daughter, then watch this and you’ll be pleasantly surprise. I recommend to anyone with an afternoon to waste, and all Dracula fans.  I give this film two Count Duckula’s.

Horror Movie a Day: Dracula’s Daughter

OMG! First the Hunger, Then Vampyros Lesbos and now Dracula’s Daughter brings us MORE Lesbian Vampires. This time shockingly in 1936.

After the success of Bride of Frankenstein, Universal Pictures decided to get the ball rolling with a female taking over the reins for Drac. This film is an immediate sequel to the original Bela Lugosi Dracula. It takes place just after Jonathan Harker and Mia have left Van Helsing’s side at the end of the last film. But the police have now arrived and Van Helsing has two explain the two dead bodies, Renfield with his neck broken, and Count Dracula with a stake through his heart.

I give the film credit for showing us the aftermath of the original. After many of these horror films I always wonder how the hero explains away killing all his zombified neighbors, the were wolf who just turned back into a man, or the vampire masquerading as an affluent Count. Here Van Helsing faces charges from Scotland Yard, so he requests helm from a former pupil of his. A psychiatrist turned action hero, named Dr. Garth.

Meanwhile the famous artist Countess Zaleska has come to town to take possession of Dracula’s corpse and destroy it. It seems she’s seeking release from her Vampiric curse. The movie has given us another first, the remorseful Vampire. Not sure if the world, in film or literature had been acquainted before this film with the whiny Vampire who hates his immortality, but as I suspected, Louis from Interview With A Vampire and Angel from Buffy owe their roots to a woman. They certainly bitch like one. ;)

Countess Zaleska also seeks help from Dr. Garth. She hopes to be cured, if not of Vampirism, then of her desire to kill and wants to stop being so gloomy all the time. Her undead curse is unbeknownst to Garth, so he agrees to help her with whatever is troubling her. But as a Vampire she still has to feed and she’s leaving a trail of corpses around town. Which of course Dr. Garth is investigating for his Van Helsing’s case.

Zaleska enlists the help of Sandor her creepy manservant to bring women to her. Women that serve a double purpose, first they undress and pose for her, then they become a late night snack.  Unfortunately while there are strong lesbian overtones in the seduction of her prey, No contact is ever actually made with the Countess and any of her victims, male or female. While Bela Lugosi is able to approach his victims and cast a cape over them as he gets down to business, the Countess can only stare at them menacingly before the scene cuts away. We never even see fangs.

Eventually Dr. Garth puts two and two together and follows her all the way to Transylvania to stop her evil plans. By now Zaleska knows she can’t be cured, but wishes to turn the good Doctor so he can accompany her throughout eternity. Since she was never truly evil the movie uses this as reason for why she must be destroyed in the end.  Sandor is now upset because the Countess had promised him immortality. And we soon learn he really has been calling the shots the whole time. He kills the Countess to stop her from turning the Doctor, and then tries to kill the doctor as well.

This movie is major letdown. While I was hoping we’d have a female villain who would be more than just a screaming plot device, like the Bride of Frankenstein. She turned out to be just a weak and ineffectual woman controlled and or pushed around by the men she encountered. First Dracula who’s grasped she wished to escape. Then the good Doctor who just pushed her out of the way a few times to learn her secrets. Where was her Vampiric strength? She couldn’t even glamour her male victims. She had to hypnotize them with jewelry. The final insult was her destruction at the hands of her jealous manservant.  Hollywood would have a long way to go before offering us a strong female lead.

I definitely enjoyed this movie more than the vanilla version of Dracula. It had a decent score that kept the film moving along. And despite it sharing the exact same plotline as almost every single vampire movie ever made. It at least was innovative in offering us a Female Vampire as the headliner. Also an interesting subplot with Van Helsing, The very first remorseful Vampire, and of course the very first Lesbian Vampire scene ever.  I totally recommend it to Dracula fans and lesbians.

I give the film Two Grandpa Munsters!!

Horror Movie A Day: Dracula (1931) in Spanish.

For many years I’ve heard tell of a version of Dracula that came out the same year as the legendary 1931 version with Bela Lugosi. It supposedly feature the same script and set, but was filmed with a cast of Spanish speaking actors. And rumor has it, it was a vastly superior version.

Although I will admit, that Bela Lugosi is simply magnetic on screen, even to this day. I myself have never cared for the original Dracula. After the first 30 minutes or so It’s starts to drag and while I’m sure it was horrifying in it’s day, it’s just a big bore today It doesn’t hold up as well as Frankenstein, which is a much more lively and kinetic film. I have seen a version Universal put out with a Phillip Glass score that is absolutely amazing. The film at this point becomes a near masterpiece and is almost riveting. You almost wish you could turn down the other actor’s dialogue and just enjoy Lugosi with Philip Glass. But the original version has no score and therefore suffers tremendously as a result.

In the 1930’s it seems it was common practice for studios to make foreign language versions of many of their films. Not many of these survived, but Dracula luckily was one of the few. The English crew would wrap up in the evening, and the Spanish crew would come in then and work throughout the night. They had the benefits of watching the dailies every day and therefore took that opportunity to basically beat the English crew at their game. The result is a much stronger film. It’s darker, sexier, better artistic camera angles, which was a blessing at that time where most film work was static and dull. They also had an expanded running time that allowed the film to develop the storyline.

Oh and did I mention it was funnier? The Spanish cast was full of good humor and took some of the piss out of some of the absurd bits of the script. This keeps the film lively, cause it also suffers through some of the same pacing issues and lack of score. There was also some unintentional humor here as well. The actor who plays Dracula does his best, I’m sure, but he was told to mimic Lugosi to such an extent, he ends up looking like someone’s uncle Pancho in a cape.

“if you keep making that face it’s gonna stay that way”

In the end though, it’s surprisingly a decent flick, The actor who plays Renfield is amazing, The Hispanicized names are hilarious. (Jonathan Harker becomes Juan Harker). Oh and Lucy Westenra, or Lucia, doesn’t just die from the vampire’s bite. Through throwaway dialogue we’re told she awakens and becomes a mysterious lady in white who lures little children with candy and then drains their blood. No way would they have stood for this in the U.S. in 1931.

I enjoyed this and can recommend to anyone who can deal with subtitled score-less movies, or Hispanics who will get a kick out of some of the wacky dialogue chock full of Mexican slang. I give this film two Count von Count’s.

That’s two Count Von Count’s Ah-Ah-ah-ah-ah..

Horror Movie A Day: Vampyros Lesbos

For those of you who are male I probably don’t have to say more than just the film’s title to have you run out to the Blockbuster in search of it. Lesbian Vampires is the only thing that will resonate though your mind throughout the rest of this review. Is Jess Franco’s 1971 horrotica classic a must see? Yes, but only so you can bring it up in conversation later.

Let’s get right down to it. The movie is schlock. Late Early 70’s psychedelic sexploitation. When the Lesbian Vampires are on screen you don’t even give a damn what else is going on. It’s almost like one of those porn movies with plot. You really just want to fast forward to the Lesbo Vampires.

The good news is you really don’t need to know what’s going on. The movie is simply a remake of Dracula. But with chicks. It follows the same plot of Jonathan Harker headed up to Castle Dracula on business. But instead we have Linda Westinghouse a lawyer with the firmer of Simpson and Sons, it seems a countess in Istanbul has inherited the Estate of Count Dracula. Linda finds the Countess sunbathing on her private island. They quickly turn this first meeting into a skinny dipping romp, followed by nude sunbathing. As the Countess declares, it’s just more fun when you are not alone. The countess prefers female companions because of her hatred towards men. 200 years ago, soldiers raped and pillaged her village and she could do nothing to stop them. Then they came to her castle and raped her. She was ultimately saved By Count Dracula, who enjoyed her company and turned her. Watch her explain how she became a vampire in the YouTube video below.

Every scene with the Countess seducing one of her prey is captivating and titillating to say the least. The movie is full of girl on girl action. We get plenty of it, in dream sequences, flashbacks, and live on a nightclub stage.

But then the movie realizes it has to deal with stupid things like story and plot and supporting characters. The coolest of which is “Morpho”, the Countess’ henchman in an Italian suit. I think they call him Morpho cause he sometimes looks like Stallone in Rhinestone, and other times like Bob Dylan. We soon learn that Linda is special to the Countess and she wants to induct her into circle of vampire lesbians. But Linda has a pesky boyfriend who’s running all over town looking for her. He goes to see a Doctor at the loony bin who specializes in these types of cases. We’re never really sure if he’s trying top cure lesbianism or hunt Vampires. Then there’s also a sadistic hotel janitor who lost his wife to the Countess, and now hates all women.

Even though this movie dips into the dull side near the end. It’s still entertaining enough to merit a viewing. If you’re the type to partake in mood altering drugs, then this film is a good match with it’s psychedelic colors, and it’s obsession with its quick cuts to scorpions, flashing lights, and dripping blood. in It’s got some sexy chicks. A cool henchman, and some fantastic music that Tarantino would reuse in Jackie Brown. Check it out. I give it two sexy vampire fangs.

Horror Movie a Day: Let The Right One In

Today’s entry is Let the Right One In, is a tender coming of age story about a boy and his 200 year old Vampire crush. While the Swedish novel it’s based on focuses as much on real world monsters like pedophiles and murderers, the movie sticks to the core of the story, the budding friendship between Oskar and Eli.

Oskar is a bullied child who’s darkest revenge fantasies are as disturbing as the actions of any Vampire. He wants to cut up his tormentors and make them squeal like a pig. Because of recent events, tormented children where tormented children are now seen as villains, when we first meet Oskar he’s not a very likeable character. Despicable even. We soon learn that his mother is vary caring and his father also dotes on him as father does a son. But they are separated and Oskar seems to have fallen through the cracks because of his father’s alcoholism and his splitting her time between working late and her new boyfriend. No one seems to mind the bruises he comes home with.

His new neighbor Eli notices though. Eli is a strange sort of child who regularly joins Oskar on the plain ground in the late afternoon once the sun has set. Eli lives with a caretaker Håkan, which one immediately assumes is a father or uncle. We soon learn though, that Eli is the master in the relationship. Eli’s a 200 year old child vampire, and Håkan is a manservant. A rash of murders in the nearby village is Håkan’s handiwork. He’s collecting blood for Eli, who although is a strong for child of that apparent age, Eli would have some difficulty feeding on a full grown man.

Oskar and Eli develop a special kind of bond. He teachers Eli Morse code and they begin to communicate though their bedroom walls. Håkan grows jealous of the situation and we begin to see him for who he really is. There’s a scene in Highlander where the immortal Connor MacLeod rescues a World War 2 orphan, whom later turns out to be his secretary Rachel in modern day New York.. You get the feeling their relationship went through a phases were MacLeod was at first her father, then her Lover and now Rachel is his mother figure. You get the same feeling with Håkan, who is willing to do anything for Eli, and that they were also childhood friends, and now he has assumed the fatherly caretaker role. When he asks Eli to stay away from Oskar you feel both at once jealousy and fear at Oskar being trapped in the same role he is, and for a moment your sucked away from the fantasy, and into the harsh reality of this evil Vampire child. Many times the film brings you back to that same feeling, when Eli feeds or gets a blood lust, or when Eli callously talks about victims or tries to equate blood lust to Oskar’s desire for revenge. You wake up and shake your head at the cute little child vampire, point and shout EVIL!

But your always sucked back in to the love story. This isn’t a timeless teen lust we see in Twilight. This isn’t Claudia and Louis from Interview with a Vampire after the honeymoon has ended. It always feels innocent and not sexual. But let’s face it Eli’s a Vampire so it always feels seductive. I wouldn’t say this is the “My Girl” of Vampire films but it’s close. Maybe a dark version of Fox and The Hound? ;)

Oskar is drawn to the vampire. He doesn’t care what Eli is. He doesn’t care that Eli is not a girl, he doesn’t care that Eli is a 200 year old vampire, such is his attraction. And it may be more than just simple attraction. We’re right there with him as he’s trying to befriend Eli and Eli seems uninterested. When he offers candy and Eli refuses, his heart seems wounded. Eli sees this and despite knowing better eats the candy and begins to feel ill. It begins to feel like young love, and what we’re willing to do for it. We feel Oskar’s nervousness as he tries to get a peek of Eli undressing. We feel his contempt when Eli’s fucked up and revealed the vampire within. We can see the pain Oskar feels as he watches Eli attempt to enter his home without an invite and Eli begins to decompose and deteriorate. For what other reason do we cause pain to others and let others cause us this pain, if isn’t love.

I don’t really want to spoil anything more. This is great film about childhood innocence and young love you’re hooked immediately soon after they meet. The final scenes when the bullies finally get their comeuppance is frightening not just in a supernatural way but also the real-life fear Oskar feels as the victim of bullying.

The DVD Box has several quotes on it, the one that stands out from the Washington Excelsior reads. “Best. Vampire Movie. Ever”

I wouldn’t go that far. But it is a damn good one. I give it three boxes of Count Chocula.

Watch it now before the American Remake shies away from some of the un-christian like subject matter, and casually turns this one into a Tween Twilight.