Week 89 - Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom

Alternate Titles : Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma

Year: 1975

Reviews / Author Comments due: 02/02/2013

Reason for Inclusion: Banned for over 20 years, Subject of a police raid when shown at a London cinema club (where BBFC ratings are not required, but obscenity laws still apply)

BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 2000

More Info: Wikipedia, IMDB

DVD: LINK

---

Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.

The Virgin Spring - Lisa's Review

***SPOILERS ***

A movie this week I don't think I would have ever chosen to watch having read the premis.  That's the good thing about doing these movie challenges, you get to see movies, you would never otherwise have watched.

I'm not going to do a blow by blow account of the movie.  This is the Swedish movie made in 1960, that 'Last House on the Left' was based on.  Although there are very good things to be said about both LHOTL movies (1972 and 2009), this movie is an altogether different experience.  Whereas I would describe its successors are exploitation movies, this is not on any level.  Its a deep movie that makes you think, that does disturb you, but in a different way.

To start with the cinematography in this movie is just beautiful!  It is a joy to watch aesthetically.  From a story point of view its heartbreaking.  We see the young, beautiful, but very naive and innocent daughter (Karin) of a religious couple raped and murdered by 2 herdsmen when she is delivering candles to a church.  This is all witnessed by her pregnant adoptive sister and maid (who is stunningly beautiful it has to be said) and a young boy who is with the herdsmen.

Unwittingly the men seek shelter at the girls parents home and try to sell the clothes they stripped off her body after they had killed her, alerting them to what had happened.

The parents being deeply religious people opens up all sorts of questions when they seek revenge for their daughters murder and kill the herdsmen.  The father seems to question his faith when wondering how something like this could possibly happen, but at the same time he wants to make up to god for what he has done, so he promises to build a church on the site of where his daughters body was found.  A virgin spring has sprung forth from where she was found and her parents heartbreakingly wash their daughter in it.

I found this movie very thought provoking and beautiful to watch.  My skin crawled  towards the herdsmen characters.  They were repugnant.  The actual rape scene was horrid and although not graphic, it was very matter of fact and to the point.  There is no soundtrack to this movie.  No music to set a mood, or to tell us how we should feel or cover an uncomfortable scene with peril.  This made the rape scene all the more nasty for me.

The murder of Karin and the herdsmen is again very to the point and not blood thirsty but is oddly effective.   I liked how fire was used in a scene with one of the herdsmen and the reality of how the father throws the young boy against a wall in his grief.

This movie is certainly not for everyone, but I for one enjoyed it.  It was very different from anything I have watched before and I found it refreshingly different.  I would recommend it to all movie fans who like to unearth little hidden treasures.

Thumbs up from me.

Virgin Spring - Will's Review

This week, I watched our scheduled move one Sunday (the first 'legal' day) which I thought would give me plenty of time to write a review... But every day I've sat down, determined to put fingers to keys (or thumbs to touch screen) and come up with... Nothing; so here I sit, Friday night, still trying to think of enough to say by Saturday.

It's not that the film was bad, as such; it was certainly well shot, and there's lots here for film students and media studies types to get all chin-stroky about... But that's not my thing.

In its day, I'm sure the matter-of-factness of things like the rape scene and the fathers subsequent revenge were a revelation. I can see that the lingering, thoughtful shots, the way the camera stays behind the father, allowing him to stand in the distance and contemplate what he has done, would have been, in 1960, a revelation to many film makers, and I understand that they have shaped movie making in a way we still see today.

But that's the problem; we see them today. All the time. By being innovative, it's methods have become the norm; 53 year later, they don't seem so impressive.

So the movie has to stand on it's own two feet, in 2013, as a piece of entertainment. And it doesn't.

Like every rape-revenge movie that has followed it, 2/3rds of the film pass before we get to the 'rape / revenge' part; Until that point, it's a fairly run-of the mill medieval set black and white drama about a religious 'Lord of the Land' type, and his household; the type of movie I used to find my gran watching on channel four on a Sunday afternoon (and think 'why?').

Unlike it's more recent copy-cats, the revenge when it comes is swift, and matter of fact; yes it's brutal, but at the same time it's over far too quickly to have any real impact, or (to me at least) satisfactory emotional payoff.

But perhaps that's the point; if we consider the closing scenes of Wes Craven's quasi-remake (last house on the left), we see there too that the 'revenge' chi ever nothing of note - the family remains incomplete and broken. Maybe that's how it should be.

Unlike Last House, The Virgin Spring continues to follow the father for a shot time after his revenge, to show us the emptiness, the realization that he has done things he perhaps should not. As a very religious man, we see him try to reconcile the events of the movie, both his daughters ordeal and his own reaction, with his faith; that's potentially interesting, but was for me too calm and easily resolved (or accepted). There was also a small supernatural element, which to me felt out of place.

So there it is, it's beautiful, but dated and a little dull; I wouldn't mark it 'avoid', as I like to reserve that for films I feel completely wasted my time, but I'm a long way from recommending it.

If I were you, I'd stick to Last House (70s or 2000s versions) or I Spit on Your Grave (again, 70s or 2000s).

As I wrote that last paragraph, it occurred to me that maybe there's a reason that both of those films have a very direct remake; where as there is only one Virgin Spring...

Week 88 - Virgin Spring

Alternate Titles : The Virgin Spring, Jungfrukällan

Year: 1960

Reviews / Author Comments due: 26/01/2013

Reason for Inclusion: This movie was loosly remade as 'nasty' Last House on the left. Also, believed to be the first film with on-screen vomiting.

BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 1994

More Info: Wikipedia, IMDB

DVD: LINK

---

Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.

Leatherface: Texas Chainsaw Massacre III - Lisa's Review

*** SPOILERS ***

In much the same way as the second installment in our 'Texas Chainsaw' series was much removed from the original, this movie is even more removed.

The only original characters we seem to have are Leatherface himself and the notion of 'Grandpa' who is a mummified corpse who sits at the dinner table, but is inexplicably fed blood by his 'family'.  Do they think he's alive???

This movie predominantly follows the characters Michelle & Ryan as they travel across country (passing through Texas) to deliver a car to Michelles dad.  As they travel, they pass through a police checkpoint where a mass grave has been found containing bodies in various states of decay.  To us the viewer, this obviously makes it clear to us that we are nearing Leatherface territory.

They decide to stop at a secluded petrol station (appropriately called 'Last Chance') where they meet a rather nasty, slack jawed idiot (Alfredo)with creepiness and perversion hanging out of him!  Things do seem to be getting a bit sinister when a handsome stranger comes to their aid in the form of Tex (Viggo Mortensen... ey up!!).  He helps them avoid a potentially disasterous outcome, even though they refuse to give him a lift to where he's going.  As they leave, Alfredo shoots through their back window and is seen to shoot at Tex.  Michelle and Ryan think he's possibly killed him... (I noted they didn't go back to help him though!)

As they drive, they decide to take a route recommended by Tex and it all falls to sh*t from there-on-in.  They are ran off the road by a truck driver who throws what looks like a dead wolf at their windscreen.  (that reminds me... there is a link to the first movie with another armadillo... roadkill sadly... sorry, I deviate)   They get a flat tyre and as Ryan attempts to change it, you can imagine what happens.... yup Leatherface makes his appearance!

What follows is stereotypical slasher movie stuff (with remarkably little gore again).  We have the introduction of another character in the form of a survivalist, Benny who ends up off the road when Ryan jumps into the road at a rather inappropriate moment looking for help.  As suspected, Ryan eventually meets an end.   Michelle is obviously going to be our heroine.  A rather hardy lass who escaped Leatherfaces clutches is introduced and is hiding in the forest.  She is the sister of a girl we saw murdered and have her face made into a mask at the start of the movie.  She surprisingly meets a very quick and easy death.

Without describing the rest of the movie scene by scene, we find out that Alfredo, Tex and the guy who ran them off the road (Tinker) are all part of a 'family' with Leatherface, Mamma and a cute little blonde haired girl (who is a little sh*t.. she is introduced when she stabs Michelle).  We also have the corpse of Granpa sitting at a table.  There is no creepy scene like we had in the first movie.  If anything, the whole thing is a bit comedic.  Mamma is a character I would have liked to have seen more of.  She had a voicebox which she has to touch to attain a robotic voice.  I would have also liked to have seen more development of Leatherfaces character.  There is obviously a lot more to him than this movie shows, a little digging would have been good.  Everything just seemed too 'surface'.

We have a very quick crescendo and ending, which is completely unbelievable and anti-climatic.  Benny, who we are convinced has died while battling Leatherface in a lake and falling on his new 'pimped' chainsaw, makes a reappearance, almost gets killed again and survives.  Michelle obviously survives to drive off into the sunset after caving in Leatherfaces skull in the same lake and shooting Alfredo (who was trying to kill Benny) with a shotgun.

What can I say?  I didn't dislike this movie at all.  It was an ok way to spend a couple of hours.  It was easy to watch.  The acting was good.  I didn't say 'Oh ffs' even once!  I would recommend it to someone wanting a straightforward slasher type movie, but someone who maybe didn't want too much blood.  I however would have liked a little more delving inside the characters, especially Leatherface.

However this movie has to be taken as a completely seperate movie to the original.

Leatherface: Texas Chainsaw Massacre III - Will's Review

And so, the law of diminishing returns rings true...

Only the first film is mentioned in the opening crawl (ignoring the 2nd), and Leatherface is the ONLY returning Sawyer, transplanted inexplicably into a new family! (well, a grandpa is in it now, it may be the same one, but he's dead either way).

This time out (as hinted in the title) the goal is clearly to take Letherface to franchise, and pretty much abandon the TCM legacy.

And it fails.. miserably.



With the new family, this could also be seen as a reboot to the franchise; in fact, opening crawls asside, both is entry and the 2nd could be seen as completely unrelated movies, which each have a take on the character of Leatherface, but don't take place in the same fictional universe.

One thing I loved in the first movie (but it was underplayed and a lot of people miss it) is that Leatherface has a verity of masks, which he wears to suit his mood. A the beginning of the film he wears the mask most of us know from merchandising; the "killing mask", and a butchers apron. Later we (briefly) see him in the kitchen, wearing a light blue ladies apron, and an "old lady" mask (with blue rinse); Finally, from dinner onward  Bubba puts on his best black suit, and a "pretty" mask (Which is to say it has make-up on and a ladies wig).

To me, if Leatherface is to be expanded upon and taken to franchise, this is the direction to go - almost like a morbid Worzel Gummidge with grotesque skin masks rather than turnip heads! Alas, like the previous entry, this movie features only a "killing mask" (although, admittedly, its a great one).

This time around the man behind the mask is R.A.Mihailoff; who, to his credit, is quite possibly the best thing in the movie, getting just the right balance between retarded and imposing; you wouldn't want to be chased by this dude, with or without his chainsaw! That said, a lot of the time I was put in mind of Kane Hodder (Jason, Friday the 13th parts 6 through 10)* so maybe it's my fondness for that series coming through.

As I've hinted a couple of times already, this entry in the TCM legacy is not a movie I could recommend  Nor is it so mind-numbingly awful that I'd tell you to avoid it either... but there are definitely slashers I'd watch before this one.



*I've just read around and it turns out that's because Hodder was the stunt man on this, and pretty much every time the chainsaw is running it IS him.

Week 87 - Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre III

Year: 1990

Reviews / Author Comments due: 19/01/2013

Reason for Inclusion: Banned in the UK for 14 years

BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 2004

More Info: Wikipedia, IMDB

DVD: LINK

---

Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 - Will's Review

*** Contains spoilers for the first "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" ***

Tobe Hooper returns to pull directorial duties; making the massive shift in tone from the original all the more baffling.

This time the terror element is toned down, while the dark comedy element is ramped way up; not that dark humor was absent from the original, but it was a lot more subtle; also the blood is upped this time (hardly surprising as the always reliable Tom Savini has been brought in for makeup effects) .

More serious than the change in tone, is the change in characterization which plagues the film; once it's in full swing, Bill Johnson is superb as Letherface, although his earlier scenes show an enjoyment to the killing and teasing of his victims which was not present, likewise Jim Siedow returning as Drayton (simply 'the cook' in part 1) now revels in the violence that he previously couldn't bear to be around; it's worth noting however, that in both cases the script, rather than the actor, is at fault.



New to the Sawyer Clan, is genera stalwart Bill Mosley, as Nam Vet 'Crop-top' - an obvious stand in for the hitch-hiker (who also returns (in prop form), as 'nubbins' a corpse that Crop-top carries around with him*)

Finally, Grandpa returns; although he is once again hidden until a dinner scene, which plays far too much like a bad do-over of the one in the first. Of all the scenes to remake in the sequel, why pick the one that has already been done so perfectly?

On the side of good (cannon fodder aside) we have only 2 character of note; local DJ 'Stretch' (Caroline Williams doing her best Laurie Metcalf impression) and 'Lefty' (Dennis Hopper), a Texas ranger, uncle of the victims from the first movie, and only man in law-endorsement who believed in the cannibal family. I have to mention at this point, that seeing Dennis Hopper shopping for filing chainsaws is a thing of beauty.

On the subject of Lefty's ties to the original; Franklyn's skeleton makes an appearance, which is just silly; not only is it still in-tact an in it's chair (surely it would have been broken down for meat), but it's also in the Sawyers new digs (they have moved several times between movies, and currently live in an abandoned theme park) implying that the family take their victims remains with them when they move.

I really do enjoy this movie, probably more than it actually deserves; but as fun as it is, its still a shame to see Leatherface and the Sawyer family reduced to a clan of post-Freddy hero killers... That said, there isn't really much sequel potential if everything had remained unchanged.

Works well as a fun horror movie, but not necessarily as a sequel to TCM...





*untill this viewing, I'd always assumed that Crop-top was the Hitchhiker; the plate being a 'repair' from his meeting with the truck in part one. Watching the two in close succession, I notice that hitch hiker's death in part one was pretty final, and he shares a facial birthmark with Nubbins the corpse.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 - Lisa's review

As I started with this weeks movie, I knew I had seen it before, but oddly I remembered absolutely nothing about it whatsoever.  Probably not the most promising start.

So with TCM being one of my favourite movies, the sequel had a lot to live up to.  Did it?  Sadly not on any level.  Where do I start?

My favourite aspect of the original movie was the mood, the cinematography, the eeriness.  These were all missing in the sequel.  In fact taking the characters aside, you would be pushed to realise these 2 movies had anything to do with each other.  Where the first movie had aspects of black comedy, which has its place in horror movies when executed well, this movie was just ridiculous.  It was over the top, silly, mad and attention seeking.

Oddly I didn't dislike the movie.  I think if watched alone with no expectations and no reference whatsoever to the first movie, its a fun little watch.  I liked the madness about it, the general freakiness, but I so miss the intensity of the original.  Maybe Tobe Hooper realised he couldn't improve upon perfection so took an entirely different slant?  I just wish he'd left it alone!

One thing I didn't like about TCM2 was the rehashing of iconic scenes from the original movie, mainly the dinner scene from the first movie involving grandpa.  He makes a return in this movie to pretty much do exactly the same thing!  I'm like "what the hell are you doing?"... its as if, they know it went down well first time around so they thought they'd put the same scene in again?  BIG mistake.  It turned an almost parody like movie into a wannabe movie or a weaker sibling.  Surely Mr Hooper had some more sick gems in this head of his?  

Another thing which I found extremely irritating is the constant chainsaw wielding done by Leatherface, again overkill of the famous scene at the end of the first movie.  This time though he does a stupid little shuffle dance when he raises the chainsaw aloft.  Wtf is going on with that?

There are some genuinely funny moments in this movie (a chainsaw up the bum for one) and some genuinely yuck moments (the delayed reaction to having a slice of your head removed) but all in, I was just disappointed with this movie.

As a stand-alone movie, its an ok popcorn movie to watch with friends, but if there is any comparison to be made to the original, forget it.  This one fails spectacularly.  With that in mind, I can neither recommend or advise to avoid.  It just makes me wish the might Texas Chainsaw Massacre was left well alone.

Week 86 - The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2

Alternate Titles : The Texas Chainsaw Massacre part 2

Year: 1986

Reviews / Author Comments due: 12/1/2013

Reason for Inclusion: Refused classification in 1990 when distributors would not agree to over 20 mins of cuts.

BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 2001

More Info: Wikipedia, IMDB

DVD: LINK

---

Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre - Will's Review

What can I even begin to say about TCM that hasn't already been said?

Unoriginal though this sentiment may be; the first thing I'm going to say is 'if you haven't seen Texas Chain Saw; go watch it'. Although that seems a little redundant; if you like horror movies enough to have found yourself on the corner of the interwebs where people watch one every week, then you have almost certainly seen this one a couple of times already!

With that in mind, I'm not going to be especially mindful of spoilers from here on in.

The thing I think most people find so surprising about this movie is the lack of blood.

The only blood-drawing scenes are 2 smallish knife cuts (one to a hand, one an arm) a pricked finger, and an accidental 3" cut to Leatherface's leg... Only the latter would require stitches!

The second thing that surprises people is that it takes more than one viewing to even realise how little blood there is; the movie is such an assault on the senses that a first viewing is likely to leave you too overloaded to notice specifics. The soundscape especially seems to have been (and I'm sure; was) especially made to fill you with fear, and knock you mentally off balance.

After a nerve jangling opening, the movie quickly settles down into a quite road trip; the visit from a demented hitch-hiker acts as groundwork for what is to follow, but still the tone quietens down as out cast (surprisingly, to a modern audience) arrive at their intended destination.

This quietness though, is what gives the films 3rd act it's power; from the second we enter the Sawer's home, the nerve jangling goes up to 11, and doesn't let up for the rest if the movie.

Really the only problem I have with this film is Grandpa... Until he turns up, the film is squarely in 'it could happen' territory; and suddenly showing a... Whatever grandpa is (a zombie?) really bugs me.

But then without Sawer Snr, we'd miss one of the most horrifying scenes ever commuted to film; The hitchhiker, assisting grandpa in an attempted slaughter of our final girl; it's so drawn out that it's not easy to watch, and by the time she finally loses it and goes hysterical, we completely understand!

It's hard to believe that this was brought to us by the same Tobe Hooper who would go on to bring us "The Mangler" and the "Toolbox Murders" remake...

Fun Facts:

• The Roadkill armadillo from near the beginning of the film did not appear in the script; the crew just found it on location.
• Letherface's self-inflicted chainsaw wound did not use a stuntman, and was achieved by placing a metal plate, and then a steak, on actor Gunnar Hansen's leg under his trousers. Hansen sustained a burn to his leg because of the friction between the chainsaw and the plate.

Texas Chain Saw Massacre - Lisa's Review

*** SPOILERS ***

This week I had the priviledge of watching one of my favourite horrors - Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  Bit of an odd way I first saw this one.  I never fancied it as I've never been a 'Slasher/Gore Fest' fan... that's not to say I don't like a bit of gore, I just like a story with my gore... something to make me think.  I came home one night quite late, switched on the TV and this one was on.  I was completely transfixed and unable to take my eyes off it.  When it finished, I got my hands on a copy so I could watch it in its entirety.

So we've established I love it.  Why should you watch it?  This movie is gorey in places, yes, but not anywhere near as much as you'd expect.  It has an uncomfortable, eerie feel all the way through.

Without going into too much detail, a group of young friends (Sally, Franklin, Pam, Jerry and Kirk)are travelling to visit Sally & Franklins grandfather as there have been reports of vandalism.  During this process, they pick up a derranged hitchhiker who they manage to force out of their van after he slashes Franklin (who happens to be in a wheelchair) and himself.  This is merely an introduction though, as he appears later with greater relevance.

They then stop at a petrol station, but find the pumps empty.  They head onwards towards Sally & Franklins grandfathers home.  Pam and Kirk are out together when they stumble upon a house where they mean to ask about where to get petrol.  We have the old chestnut of the door being open but no-one answering.  Why oh why do people always go inside?

 When Kirk enters, he is intrigued by a red door with animal skulls on it, so he walks into the hallway calling out for any occupants. The star of our movie 'Leatherface' appears and prompty smacks him around the head with a mallet.  This is one of the things I love about this movie.  There is no messing about, people are dispatched with quickly and efficiently when he wants to.  The way he moves abruptly and purposefully is in itself terrifying.  We concentrate here on Kirks spasming body as he dies, there is no real gore worth talking about.  We then see one of my favourite things in the movie for the first time.. Leatherface slams shut the steel front to the door.  I don't know why, but that gives me chills.  The character is the perfect villain.  He makes your skin crawl.  How he moves, how he looks, how he sounds.

When Pam enters the house, I have a cringefest.  She see's the macabre surroundings, including furntiure made from human bones.  Oddly she seems freaked out by a large chicken in a small cage.  She decides to leave and runs for the hall.  Leatherface appears again and grabs her as she just manages to exit the back door.  He carries her back into the room he took Kirks body before impaling her very matter-of-factly on a meathook - Genius!  You see the hooks, you know they'll come in somewhere, but you don't expect it to be so quick and done in such a way that its almost not even thought about.  The direction is fantastic.  We don't concentrate on the entry of the hook into Pams back, but instead on her fear, her reaction, the surroundings - like the bucket beneath her to collect her blood.  A corpse lies in front of her on a table and Leatherface powers up his chainsaw and sets to dismembering it in front of her.  I'm assuming this is Kirk.

Jerry later goes to look for his friends and finds the house.  He discovers Pam in a freezer, but Leatherface comes upon him and kills him with the same mallet that befell Kirk.  He pushes Pam back into the freezer.

The last of our set of friends Sally and Franklin (brother and sister) set out looking for the others.  Leatherface comes across them and kills Franklin with his chainsaw.  Sally manages to get away and runs into the house.  She soon realises all is not well with some sinister discoveries and escapes from Leatherface by jumping out of an upstairs window.  She runs to the petrol station from earlier seeking help, but the owner ties her up and takes her back to the house.  The hitchhiker also makes another appearance.  It turns out, he is Leatherfaces brother!

What follows is probably one of the most famous scenes in the movie and probably the oddest, horrifying scene I have ever seen.  Everything is f*cked up!  Sally is sitting around a table with these warped people, who she knows is going to kill her.  The surroundings are horrid!  There even seems to be a lamp made of the skin from a persons head above the table.  An old man referred to as 'Grandpa' is brought down and the others hold Sallys head over a bucket as he tries to kill her by hitting her head with a hammer.  he is too old and too weak so keeps missing or striking her with half blows.  This would be much more terrifying than being bludgeoned to death, this slow torture.  HORRIBLE!

In a complete turnaround, Sally manages to escape.  The hitchhiker is killed by a truck which hits him as he chases her.  We end the movie with Sally in the back of the pick-up truck covered in blood screaming as Leatherface is yelling in the road swinging his chainsaw above his head.  This scene later became the infamous movie cover.  Awesomeness!!  I LOVE this movie!

Big Fat Recommends going on this one.