The Hitcher (1986)

,

This is a film whose time has passed, in my opinion anyway. There was a time when this was scary and effective and such but I think it has lost its touch for a few reasons. To me this is just another version of Duel (1971) where you actually get to see the driver of the other car, Duel was the first of its kind and was effective because you never found out who the other driver was, or why they were chasing the main character. In the Hitcher, you know the killer's name is John Ryder, but the most effective part of this movie was you never knew why he was torturing C Thomas Howell's character so much, but since No Country for Old Men (2007) came out I don't know if this film can be as effective on people who have already seen that now. Because in NCFOM, Javier Bardem's character is basically the ultimate evil/crazy person, he kills again and again without having need to and he never explains why he does it, just like The Hitcher, but NCFOM one ups the Hitcher because The Hitcher isn't very believable at all in my opinion. After ditching the Hitcher countless times he always seems to catch back up to C thomas Howell at the most convenient times ever, I just think that it's too slim of a chance that they would keep meeting at the right times, etc. Plus this film is famous for its extreme violence, (jennifer jason leigh gets torn in half) and I'm not a big gore fan so I found the extreme violence more than a tad unnecessary. Nevertheless, this movie had a big cult following for a while and it was made into an HBO TV show, a sequel (with C Thomas Howell, and Jake Busey (son of Gary Busey)) and a remake with Sean Bean (LOTR, Game of Thrones,Black Death) as the Hitcher. Also hitch-hiking is pretty much illegal in most places around the country, and most people know how bad of an idea it is nowadays anway, so the thrill/scare in that isn't as likely anymore. Rutger Hauer (Blade Runner, Hobo with a Shotgun, Ladyhawke,) does do an excellent job as the hitcher though, I give this one a 3/5. Watch the trailer below:

The Warriors (1979)

If you were to look up an example of what a "cult" movie is I think you would first run into the Star Wars franchise, then perhaps the Evil Dead series and then The Warriors would probably be listed next. This film has maintained a strong cult following since its release 35 years ago. When I was in high school/middle school (junior high) this film had a resurgence of popularity because it had two popular video game adaptations made of it one in 2005 just called The Warriors, and one in 2009 called The Warriors:Street Brawl, and there have also been comic book adaptations of the film. The film gathered $3.5 million on its opening weekend, but was linked to acts of vandalism and violence the following weekend including 3 killings, two in southern California and one in Boston, involving movie goers heading to or from the theater. Almost all the film's advertising was severely cut to show only the title the rating of the film and theater locations, and at least 200 theaters upped security during showings of the film. Most people nowadays are not aware that the film was actually relatively successful on it's initial release ($16.4 million in its 6th week when the film was made for between $6-7 million) because of its status as a "cult" film. 

The film is about a meeting between all the gangs of New York in the late 70s coming together to hear the leader of the most feared gang in the city propose a citywide truce among all the gangs so that they can work together to better control the city, but one of the people in the crowd didn't like that idea and didn't follow the rules because he came armed, you know this because he shoots and kills the leader Cyrus during his speech. The killer then blames a rival gang called the warriors and everybody is now convinced the warriors are responsible for the killing. The rest of the film is about the warriors trying to get back across the city to their home turf of Coney Island without getting killed by every other gang in the city. This film is definitely partially about youthful angst, but it is also somewhat of an urban retelling of Homer's The Odyssey. The warriors encounter no end of trials on their way back home, from rival gangs to siren like temptations,

  the police, to being separated from each other. Now I thought I'd never be interested in this film because I've never been the type of person to like the ideas of gangs or gang related violence, but this film is a lot more than that as I just previously mentioned. In addition to the deeper side of the film it is very well done visually and is very visually appealing. Critic Pauline Kael of The New Yorker called it "visual rock". It also has somewhat of a cartoony feel to it because every gang has a different theme, there's a gang of mimes, a gang of ninjas, and a gang of face painted Jersey wearing baseball bat wielding psychopathic ballplayers no less. The director wanted to divide the film into chapters and start each section with a comic book stylized splash panel, but the studio was on a fixed schedule and limited budget so the film never fully achieved its comic book look (though you can still kind of feel it in the opening titles). The most famous scene from the movie of course is the real murderer taunting the warriors with the now famous,then improvised, cry of:  "Warriorrrrrrrrrrs, come out to plaaaaaaaaaaaaay!" 

Though visually top notch this film does seem a bit empty (like more could have been happening at times) in certain scenes, and the acting is pretty good all around but you don't really get to see too much character development throughout, and some of the acting is just plain cheesy, but in the best possible way (in the last ten minutes especially). This movie is also noted as an early appearance of future Oscar winning actress Mercedes Ruehl, and this movie features the 70s hit single "In the City" by Joe Walsh (the song was from this movie). I give this a 4.25/5 overall, a 4 for how well made it is, and a 4.5 for how much I enjoyed it, so that averages to about 4.25/5. You can view the trailer below:  

Knightriders (1981)

One might not think this would be the followup to George Romero's internationally successful genre redefining political commentary/horror flick Dawn of the Dead (1978). But in some ways it makes sense, this is Romero's most personal film. This flick follows a travelling renaissance fair troupe lead by Ed Harris (in his first lead role) that puts on dangerous stunt shows and jousts on motorcycles. Ed Harris's character has made it his life dream to make this travelling troupe based on principles similar to that of the knights of King Arthur, he and his troupe live by a code. But trouble arises when reality threatens to destroy the dream he has made in the form of corporate america destroying the little man and/or what he stands for (publicity agents want to commercialize the motor cycle shows). This is so personal for Romero because he was going through the same personal struggle when it came to film making, he had worked long and hard to make a name for himself as an independent film maker, but after the success of Dawn of the Dead he was debating whether or not to "sell out," and his decision to remain independent gave him similar results to Harris's character in the film, they both saw the people around them leave and "sell out".

All that being said this film does have some depth to it but for the majority of the film it is just plain fun. It is super laid back, you get to see all the life behind the scenes of the fair and it mostly feels like one big party, complete with a scene or two of singing around the campfire. In addition to the laid back vibe and fun feel of the film seeing a modern take on some of the legends of King Arthur are creatively re-envisioned here: Merlin is a tattooed harmonica playing wiseman/doctor, the black knight is present, what happens between Lancelot and Guinevere happens, and Harris is the well loved king. Not to mention the motorcycle jousts stunts and battles are all wonderfully choreographed and exciting (except for the final one which I actually had to fast forward through).This film has some of the most dangerous/elaborate/well performed motor cycle stunts ever filmed. Now for the negatives of the film: it did not need to be as long as it was, it's two and a half hours long, there are also some big logical fallacies/plot holes towards the second half of the movie, the ending is sad (normal for a Romero movie) but the ending could have been executed better IMO (I can't say much more about it without giving it

away). The acting is top notch though, Harris gives a wonderful performance as well as does Tom Savini the famous horror movie makeup artist (Friday the 13th series, Dawn of the Dead, and TheBurning) as Morgan the black knight. It is mentionable that Stephen King has a cameo as "hoagie man" and his real life wife plays "wife of hoagie man," you can find them in the crowd in an early scene. Cracked.com has written an article about Knightriders calling it 5 insane moments from the manliest movie ever made. It is also mentioned in a book I own called 500 Essential Cult Films: The Ultimate Guide by Jennifer Eiss. I give it a 4/5, you can view the trailer below:

Repo Man (1984)

This is a wacky cult film in the same vibe as Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas or the Big Lebowski. Emilio Estevez plays an angsty rebellious punk youth dissatisfied with society who finds himself on the inside of the seedy world of Repo Men. A lot of the movie is just kind of like an episode of Seinfeld or a more eventful version Dazed and Confused; The movie jumps back and forth switching its focus from Estevez to the other repo men, to a bunch of criminals. a mysterious government agency, and a strange man driving a Chevy malibu which all the character slowly become focused on and in search of. The Chevy malibu contains a strange energy source in its trunk which emits a bright light that vaporizes anyone who opens the trunk.The movie slowly becomes more and more about aliens and has an apropriately wacky climax sequence with a flying car. This film can either be taken at face value as just a fun wacky viewing, but it can be analyzed as something deeper than that too. This film contains a lot of social commentary about youth and teen angst, as well as political commentary on the US in the 80s, the economy, and a message of anti-conformity, in my mind justifying why this one's a part of the Criterion Collection. This is a good one and the director received a lot of acclaim and praise for this film in which he showed great potential of things to come, but though he did the acclaimed Sid and Nancy (1986) and Walker (1987), this director never achieved the level of fame he deserved. Cox would go on to write and direct a film called Straight to Hell (1987), which was a western starring The Irish rock legends The Pogues, Joe Strummer (lead singer of The Clash), Courtney Love, Elvis Costello, Dennis Hopper Grace Jones, and Jim Jarmusch, as well as writing an unused screenplay for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998), and he was also originally considered to direct the original Robocop (see here). Even though I didn't love it and some of its logic was a bit too unbelievable, it fit with the weirdness of the film.  It also has a great punk rock soundtrack featuring the likes of Iggy Pop and The Circle Jerks. I give it a 4.5/5. P.S. you also never find out what's in the trunk, which in my mind is what I think Pulp Fiction was referencing with its briefcase, but I've heard other theories about the briefcase so it's just a hunch. You can view the trailer below:

Maximum Overdrive (1986)

There are tons of classic movies based on works by Stephen King; Carrie, Cujo, The Shining, Christine, Pet Sematary, Firestarter, Creepshow, Children of the Corn, The Dead Zone, Salem's Lot, Silver Bullet, The Green Mile, Stand by Me, The Shawshank Redemption, Hearts in Atlantis, IT, Misery, and The Running Man, to name "a few". But until 1986 Stephen King was just a writer and every movie adaptation of his work to that point had been made by other people, this movie changed all that. Now imagine you were a producer in 1986 and Stephen King came into your office saying "I'm not happy with any film versions of my work so I'd like to direct my own film, adaptations of my work have been so successful, just think how good this one'll be! And it will be starring 80s young hunk Emilio Estevez, and it will have soundtrack done by my favorite band AC/DC!" Sounds too good to be true doesn't it? Well you're right, it has all those elements but Stephen King is what he is, a writer, plus he tends to prefer the worse movie

versions of his work, (He hated Kubrick's version of the Shining and prefers the made for TV Tim Roth version). This is the first and only movie King himself has ever directed. This movie has become a cult classic primarily only because of how bad it is. It does have some things going for it, the cars are cool, the special effects and explosions are cool and stuff like that. The film's plot is very confusing as the movie progresses, at first all technology on earth goes crazy because earth is passing through the tail of a very unusual comet, but as the plot goes on it becomes clear the machines have minds of their own and aliens are somehow involved, taking away most of the story's believably. Everyday objects are running on their own and they're all deadly too, this is meant to instill a fear of the stuff we take for granted, and it partially works. The trucks are scary, an electric knife/saw goes nuts, and a man is fried by a pinball machine, but it reaches a point where it all becomes laughable. A man is killed by a soda vending machine shooting him in the crotch, seen here:

 There's a killer ice cream truck, and a man is laying dead on his front lawn having been run over by his own lawnmower, and the very first scene of the movie is Stephen King himself trying to get money from an ATM and instead of giving him the money the machine calls him an asshole repeatedly, seen below:

 Plus the film is just plain gross at times, there's a scene where Emilio Estevez is talking to a man on the toilet doing "his business" which is unfortunately audible. The music is great though, the explosions and stuff are cool, the main truck has the face of the Green Goblin from Spider Man on it, but that's about it for this one. I give it a 3.25/5. I do recommend the trailer though, Stephen King is hilariously crazy in it, seen below:

John Dies at the End (2012)

This is the newest film by director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm series, Bubba Ho-tep [features Bruce Campbell as an elderly Elvis battling a mummy in a nursing home for crying out loud!], and Beastmaster). It is a wacky non linear film (what Coscarelli film isn't wacky?) that features Dave and John, two college dropouts who are also interdimensional paranormal warriors. This movie is like a cross between Buckaroo Banzai, Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, and Ghostbusters. The plot is super confusing and don't even worry about understanding it because this film is purely enjoyable because of its weirdness alone, as well as its humor, the acting is good but this isn't a movie you watch for the acting, the heroes battle a monster made entirely out of deli meats and has an uncooked chicken for a head!

(that is not the main villain of the film though) This one has Paul Giamatti and Clancy Brown as its biggest name actors, and spoiler John doesn't die at the end. Who would have thunk this craziness didn't just come from the mind of Coscarelli, it was a book first, and a web-serial even before that. Genre wise this movie is a mix between sci-fi horror comedy and action. I'll say this I thought it was good, I didn't love it, but if it was a new TV show I would totally watch it, (I don't like most new TV shows)  it would be like a wackier more indie version of Supernatural. It's almost too wacky for me though, I give it a 4/5, view the trailer below:  

Halloween III (1982)

This one was famously panned by both critics and fans. Everyone thought "where's Michael Myers?" or "What the hell are they doing getting rid of the main character?". Well what they were thinking was this: John Carpenter wanted to move the series in a new direction by making films with stories that were halloween related, one idea was to make a film of vignettes that were all centered around the idea of halloween, in other words, Trick 'R Treat (2007) 25 years ahead of its time (the film would also have an interesting new piece of theme music, though the old theme does appear via the original Halloween[1978] playing on a TV) . That would have happened had the third film been a success, but what actually happened is pretty much history. The film was a commercial and critical failure resulting in the return of the Halloween series' original premise and main villain in the fourth and later installments. This film deserves another look though, while it may not fit into the Halloween series very well, it is a GREAT halloween (holiday) film. I was a child of the early 90s but having older brothers from the 80s, tons of 80s toys and movies and products (such as our child halloween costumes and decorations) from the 80s, so this is pure nostalgia for me and I love it for that reason alone, but there are plenty of other things that are unique and good about this film. After the mysterious death of a

man clutching the newest "all the rage" halloween mask, warning "they'll kill us all!", a doctor and the man's daughter do some detective work of their own and find out the owner of mysterious Silver Shamrock mask factory has a sinister plan to unleash on halloween night involving the popular masks. It has a good "amateur detective" pace throughout the film until you learn the secret, and thrills and chills are delivered throughout. One thing that is unique about the film is that it is educational on the history of Halloween. The factory owner tells the doctor that Halloween is rooted in the Celts

(Irish/scottish)  heritage, back when they used to do pagan rituals to celebrate the harvest and scare away spirits. It's cool because it proves that halloween is actually a very Irish holiday (the town the factory is located in is SUPER Irish). The secondary title for the film is "season of the witch" but as the doctor accuses the factory owner of witchcraft the owner says "we prefer to think of it as a way of controlling our environment." So it is similar to The Wicker Man in that the people are performing pagan rituals to ensure a successful harvest, not the same thing as what witchcraft and black magic usually implies. There is a connection to Stone Henge in the story, but it is never very well explained, that is its weakest point in my opinion, the other weakest point is the romantic fling between the doctor and the main woman of the story. He is blatantly cheating on his wife, and whatever excuse he gives to his wife for being gone (on the road) is super hard to believe. But as an enjoyable interesting and somewhat fresh take on a Halloween (holiday) movie, I give it a 4.75/5. This one is also featured in Rue Morgue Magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See, you can watch the trailer below:

Demon Seed (1977)

This is a weird one based on the novel by Dean Koontz about a computer that wants to reproduce with a woman and traps her in an all technological "smart house". This movies promotes a fear of technology similar to 2001 Space Odyssey, but this has the scariest computer of all time IMO, my favorite line from the computer is : "Professor I have a question for you, when are you going to let me out of this box!" It has amazing special effects (the house is automated/controlled by the evil computer, so lots of cool gadgets) it even has a 2001-like trippy color sequence, and a story that feels super fresh and new 30+ years later. The film also  has great acting starring Julie Christie carrying the half-human half-robot "child".If you watch the trailer don't worry, in the movie the husband doesn't know what's going on and that the computer has his wife captive. The trailer makes it look like the computer reproducing was his idea, and it wasn't. I give this combo of Rosemary's Baby and 2001  a 5/5, you can view the trailer below:

The Devil's Backbone (2001)

Why Pan's Labyrinth gets so much praise as Guillermo Del Toro's best film and Cronos (1993) and this film go unnoticed is beyond me. Both Cronos and this film are on the Criterion Collection and are Beautiful in many senses, visually, plotwise, set-wise, acting, effects, really great. Guillermo loves to use children in his pictures  (Cronos, and he produced The Orphanage) I believe he was probably influenced by the classic spanish film The Spirit of the Beehive, that I also recommend and love, this one takes place in an orphanage during the spanish civil war in the 1940s, and a boy from the orphanage encounters a ghost.  Whether you like Del Toro or not I recommend this one; Spooky, bloody and unique, it's like a combination of The Spirit of the Beehive, Au Revoir Les Enfants, and th violence of Pan's Labyrinth, I give it a 4.25/5; This film is also listed in Rue Morgue Magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See, view the trailer below: 

The Cars That Ate Paris (1974)

This is without a doubt one of the weirdest movies I've ever seen: It's called The Cars That Ate Paris (1974) and it's the first film by one of my favorite directors, award winning Peter Weir ( Dead Poet's Society, Truman Show, Picnic at Hanging Rock). This film has nothing to do with cars eating people or Paris France, it does however have to do with a small Austrailian town called Paris. The film is a David Lynch-esque look at the dark side of 1950s style small town life being plagued by mad max-esque violent youths. It is gorgeously filmed, scored (musically) and acted, as well as funny, creepy and disturbing at times. It is a social commentary on rebellious youth/car-culture and the aging populations attempts to keep them under their thumb. Weir's early films all have very strange feels about them, but they're all really good, as the article about it in Rue Morgue Magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See says: "Remember, you can't spell weird, without Weir." I give it a 5/5, it also has the coolest/scariest car ever. This film is a part of the Criterion Collection and is available to stream with Hulu plus. You can view the trailer below:

Kafka (1991)

This is apparently an incredibly hard to find film as it was never released on DVD. But if you do happen to find a copy of the film, here's what's in store: The movie is a historical fiction piece about novelist Franz Kafka as the main character in a world based on his own history (as an insurance clerk and writer before he became anti-establishment) and his novel The Castle. The film was the second film by Oscar winning director Steven Soderbergh (Ocean's Eleven, Twelve and Thirteen, Erin Brockavich, Traffic, Contagion, and Magic Mike) it stars Oscar Winner Jeremy Irons (Reversal of Fortune, voice of Scar from Disney's Lion King) as Kafka, it's one of the last movies by Oscar winner Sir Alec Guinness (Obi Wan from Star Wars A New Hope, and The Bridge on The River Kwai) it also features Ian Holm ( old Bilbo from Lord of The Rings and Hobbit trilogies as well as the android from Alien [1979]), and one of my favorite actors Armin Muller Stahl (Shine, Avalon). The film is in black and white for the first half and changes to color when Kafka enters the castle, it also has really cool special effects and a great fight scene on top of a giant glass dome. It's similar to Terry Gilliam's Brazil, or George Orwell's 1984 and it is pretty cool if you know a bit about Kafka, his life, and his writings. I give it a 4/5. (P.S. gotta love the internet, somebody uploaded the entire movie to youtube, find it here, or just view the trailer here. 

The Invisible Woman (1940)

This movie was one of 3 sequels to the 1933 classic Universal Studios rendition of the H.G. Wells classic, The Invisible Man. As classic as that film and story both are, I prefer this sequel by a landslide, but in all fairness they're different genres. The Invisible Man is a serious drama/sci-fi about a genius scientist driven to madness by his discovery, The Invisible Woman is a refreshing screwball comedy similar to Arsenic and Old Lace, The Man Who Came to Dinner, and My Man Godfrey. The movie features some great old celebrities such as Margaret Hamilton (the witch from the Wizard of Oz) Shemp Howard (brother of Curly from the three stooges, and himself a one time member of The Three Stooges) John Barrymore ( star of best picture winning Grand Hotel [1932] brother of other screen legends Ethel & Lionel Barrymore, grandfather of Drew Barrymore, and the basis of the tony award winning play and 2011 film starring sir Christopher Plummer, Barrymore) and forgotten comedian great Charlie Ruggles, (who made me laugh harder and more often than an old movie has in a LONG long time). Just like the 1933 Universal classic, this film features great special effects, but not only that, great writing, and great acting that give this film humor so timeless that it still feels fresh to this day. I give it a 5/5, This film is available on The Invisible man Legacy DVD collection. 

Pacific Heights (1990)

I thought I had heard of every movie on Bravo's list of 100 Scariest Movie Moments and thought I had seen all of Michael Keaton's best movies, turns out I missed this gem on both counts. It's a virtually perfect thriller on all counts and it would be a perfect movie if not for some overacting on Matthew Modine's part early on. Michael Keaton is a perfect creepy sociopath and San Francisco is such a beautiful city, and this film does a good job showing both those things. The film shows parts of San Francisco and the Pacific Heights neighborhood you don't normally see, as well as some different angles of the Golden Gate Bridge. Michael Keaton is this creepy neighbor who rents an apartment then locks himself in refusing to pay rent, leave or communicate with anyone 98% of the time, and he's ruining his landlords' lives and there's nothing they can do to stop him. Melanie Griffith did a very good job as well in this film, and oscar winning great director John Schlesinger (Midnight Cowboy, Marathon Man) adds another classic to his roster. I give it a 4.75/5 (the full movie's on youtube for those interested in it) you can view the trailer below:

Martin (1976)

This film is one that should be a vampire classic but for some reason often gets overlooked. Martin immediately preceded George A. Romero(the Living Dead pentology, creator of Tales From the Darkside)'s Dawn of the Dead (1978). Martin is a low budget (sometimes artsy) independent film that examines someone who could either just be a regular angsty teen who doesn't fit in, or an 84 year old vampire, you can't really tell though because martin doesn't have any traditional signs of being a vampire except for the craving of blood, but since he doesn't have fangs he has to get it through slashing his victim's wrists. The film is a very interesting look at how we humans as a whole are affected by traditions and superstitions and the faultiness of our own memories (his flashbacks might actually be from movies he's seen instead of actual memory. This film also serves well as a psychological case study of this person who may be a sick teen, or maybe real vampires are just totally different from what we think.  This film can be found on several underrated movie lists, or cult horror film lists including the three main movie books I consult: Rue Morgue Magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See, Horror! by Kim Newman, and 500 Essential Cult Movies by Jennifer Eiss, yet it is STILL largely unheard of. My main beef with this one was that the blood was super fake and there was too much of it, otherwise I give it a 4.5/5. Look for a cameo by a young george romero as the priest. You can view the trailer below:

The Beast Within (1982)

The Beast Within is part latter-day southern gothic, part monster movie, part amateur-detective film, and part coming of age film, The Beast Within is very well written and very well executed by director and cast. The film contains one of the longest and most elaborate transformation sequences of all time, which often gets it confused as a Werewolf film. While I'll say it's not a werewolf movie I won't say outright what the monster is, except that it's based on some form of insect and the writers did a wonderful job tying scientific

knowledge to the monster and the overall story of the film. Here's the plot: 17 years after a woman is raped on her wedding night by something "not human", her 17 year old son starts undergoing strange changes, so the parents go back to the scene of the crime to try to figure out what exactly happened that night, as well as what's happening to their son. This is a weird one, but it's very well acted and put together considering its low budget. This film was also directed by Philippe Mora, the director of another film I reviewed called Communion (1989), and this film was written by Tom holland, the man who wrote and directed the original Fright Night (1985) and Child's Play (1988).  Both this film and Communion happen to be in Rue Morgue Magazine's book of 200 Must-See Alternative Horror films. I give it a 4.5/5, view the trailer below:

Coma (1978) original

The second Crichton film I saw recently was the movie Coma (1978) it was not written by Crichton but was directed by him and based on the best selling novel of the same name. When patients go in for routine surgeries but come out in Comas, a doctor grows suspicious and does some investigating of her own. The cast was great featuring Richard Widmark and a young Michael Douglas, Ed Harris, and Tom Sellick. This one is a little slow and boring at times (the majority of the film has no musical score), and the plot can be fairly predictable at times as well (it's really similar to a film called Green for Danger [1946]) but production value is top notch (cinematography, editing, acting, what music there actually is, etc.). The film wasn't as futuristic as Looker, but it was interesting and believable in the sense that corrupt crooked things happen by those you should trust quite often (i.e.rarely trust the government, stuff like that ). I give this a 3.75/5. Also in case you can't tell what's in the background of the image up top, there's another view of it above to the left. Though a lot can be predicted about this movie, it does have a surprise or two so I will not explain the image or any more about the film. View trailer below:

Looker (1981)

I always enjoy Michael Crichton's films, he's one of my favorite sci-fi writers, and this film is written and directed by him. This movie stars Albert Finney (Big Fish, Murder on the Orient Express) and academy award winner James Coburn (The Great Escape, Monsters Inc.). The film is a futuristic dystopian thriller (like a lot of Crichton's work), where a plastic surgeon (Finney) learns that the last four patients he operated on have all died mysteriously, so tries to find a connection btween the deaths, and it leads him to a shady corporation.   This film deals with such

themes as the media's concept of what the perfect woman looks like, and some women's obsession with wanting to look perfect. The film also deals with the concept of computers eventually replacing people (in this film they do so just in TV commercials), hypnotism through electronic signals sent out through commercials, and a gun that causes "invisibility" with a seemingly plausible explanation (something to do with the gun shooting beams of light that are part of the light/color spectrum that we humans can't see, that block certain

receptors in your eyes for a short period of time). There is a great scene where Finney gets beat up by an invisible assailant. The film is a really great thriller with great acting, music, special effects and is marvelously well written and so believable (like all of Crichtons work) that part of it has become actuality today.The only thing that might bother people is that the aspect of the story where a computer can make a replica of a person, or measure one's exact eye movements has already come true, so that may make the film seem dated to some, but to me it's a reminder of how crazy the technology we have nowadays, and that maybe the invisibility and hypnosis aspects of the story aren't too far away from becoming reality. I give the film a 5/5 and highly recommend it. You can find the full movie on youtube here, and the trailer is below:

Communion (1989)

Only Christopher Walken could be completely incoherent when he's supposed to be sane and nearly completely understandable when his character's supposed to be batshit crazy, in other words, as his character gets progressively crazy, walken in his portrayal of the character becomes more coherent. This story is unique and very interesting, it's about an entire family (and group of friends) who were abducted by aliens at the same time only to think it was all a dream til much later when they realize it was real. The film is based on a book which is based on a true story but in the "true story" only Walken's character was abducted. The embellishment was an

improvement however, and the film does a marvelous job using no post-editing special effects whatsoever and is one of the last films ever to do so (meaning no CG, and whatever effects you see, happened live in front of the camera). The film is really confusing and I mainly give it a lower rating just because of that, it didn't really have much of a flow to it. Walken's acting when his character starts to "go crazy" was arguably one of his most unhinged roles and was largely improvised (there are dancing scenes with the aliens people!), but his time being "sane" is completely overacted IMO. If you like alien movies I recommend it, otherwise I just recomend reading about it. By the way, this is also the origin of the classic "tearshaped-bug-eyed-alien" look, this film was the first time they were ever depicted as such. The aliens may look fake and rubbery at times, but I felt overall this film did well with the budget they had. I give the film a 3.5/5, this film is featured in Rue Morgue Magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See, and the trailer is below:

Twixt (2011)

Twixt (2011 [theaters] 2013 [DVD]) is the latest film made by legendary director Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather, Apocalypse Now). It was panned by most critics but is a good concept and does some things well even if it isn't that great as a whole. It's a horror movie narrated by Tom Waits featuring Val Kilmer as a washed up horror writer having long in depth philosophical discussions with Edgar Allan Poe in dream sequences all taking place within a Twin Peaks-like small town, to boot. Need I say more? The actual plot involves possible vampires/witchcraft and for sure serial killing/mass murder and ghosts. The movie even though very low budget and sometimes seeming amateurish with the cinematography retains a well polished dreamlike-ness to it which is appropriate because the majority of plot development takes place in dreams. The movie has a bunch of story elements that never get fully explained though, so they either just don't make sense and you have to accept them, or, for some of them they could have just cut that detail completely. But even though those flaws exist it still kind of works because most of the movie takes place in dream sequences, and how many of you fully understand and can make total sense of your dreams? I know I rarely can. The film makes up for whatever story flaws it may have with an interesting enough concept, some surprisingly hilarious scenes, an interesting cast, and some good acting (though there is some bad acting too). I give the film an A for effort and a 3.5/5 (P.S. the film also stars Elle Fanning and Bruce Dern). Below is the trailer, followed by the funniest scene from the movie IMO (val kilmer gets drunk while trying to write his next book after his publisher tells him "I don't want any of that 'fog on the lake' crap!"): 

The Kentucky Fried Movie (1977)

The Kentucky Fried Movie (1977) the first really truly crazy spoof movie aside from the works of Mel Brooks. This was the first film by the people who brought you the Airplane! and Naked Gun series, so same kind of humor. The movie is made up of all skits and fake movie trailers, while the film quality is low (really low budget) the jokes are grade A. Definitely worth a watch or looking at select scenes. If you don't offend easily the best scene in the movie is "Catholic High School Girls in Trouble" by far, otherwise "feel around" is great too. This is also the second movie by big name director John Landis (Animal House, Blues Brothers, American Werewolf in London, the Thriller music Video). There is some gross humor here, some racial, and a lot of sexual humor.  I give it a 3.75/5 
I couldn't find a trailer so here's the "feel a-round" scene (as in, "this film is brought to you in 'Feel a-round'"):

Candyman (1992)

I'm really beginning to love Clive Barker's writing. Candyman had wonderful social commentary and actually scared me in some parts (that doesn't normally happen). The story is wonderfully interesting and I think I will have to see one of the sequels now. It's refreshing to see a Black character as a horror villain and especially a complex one who not only makes you afraid of him but simultaneously endears you to him as well. The music was designed not to give away any of the jump scares the movie featured, unlike a typical horror movie. It's also refreshing to see a horror movie set in such an urban environment as the Chicago projects (filmed in a real project) where so much real horror and sadness actually takes place. also the actress in the film was under hypnosis for a lot of scenes, that was really effective, and if you think Wicker Man when you think "not the bees!" think again, It's also a wonderful psychological study of people and urban legends. Phillip Glass's scores tend to get on my nerves at times though, and it was a bit too bloody for me at times, so I give it a 4.75/5, view trailer below:

The Crawling Eye (1958)

Though some may love the name it often gets overlooked by serious moviegoers for obvious reasons. Those who look for and enjoy serious dramas the likes of Schindler's List, won't necessarily lean towards a film titled "The Crawling Eye". But here's what you should know about it and why those other people are missing out: The Misfits wrote a song about it, Stephen King is a fan and referenced the film in IT, and John Carpenter said it was a main inspiration for The Fog(1980). The movie was developed from the ruins of a failed British TV series (The Trollenberg Terror) The film is about aliens that hide in a mountain pass always hiding in fog. The aliens start decapitating mountain climbers and prepare for a descent to the village below. The plot is centers around a woman medium who has a psychic connection with the aliens. The film is very well acted, superbly filmed from a cinematography standpoint, and unlike most 50s "B-movies" it is very logically sound. The movie's feel is similar to Hitchcock's Spellbound (1945) or The original version of The Thing (1951 aka The Thing from Another World). Just like classic creature films like Cat People (1942) rarely do you ever see the monster, until the end. This is also probably one of the first films to cover the subject of decapitation, and it did a really good job with the special effects (ahead of most 1950s standards). Mystery Science Theater 3000 did do an episode on this movie, but trust me it's still legit. I give it a 4.5-5/5, I'd advise against watching the trailer because it shows the monster, and in my opinion knowing what the monster looks like is worth waiting for. This film is featured on Rue Morgue Magazine's list of 200 Alternative Horror Films You Need to See.

Child's Play (1988)

Believe it or not there were actually a lot of killer doll movies before this one even though this is the most famous, so I had seen a lot of the same scares and "tricks" before, but it was still really good. The scenes that scared me the most were when the doll wasn't doing anything. Another thing that scared me though was when I was watching the movie I noticed that I owned the birthday banner that's in andy's apartment, and that it was hanging in the room next to me as I watched the film. Also It was surprising to see Oscar nominated actor Brad Dourif (Grima Wormtongue from The LOTR Two Towers, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest) as the killer that becomes Chucky, and I guess he voiced Chucky for all the sequels too. This film was written and directed by Tom Holland, the same guy who wrote and directed another cult classic horror film two years before Child's Play: Fright Night. Chris Sarandon (the vampire from Fright Night) is the main cop in this one. I also really loved the aesthetic of the apartment building the kid lives in, it strikes me as a mix between the apartment and building from Ghostbusters II (1989) and the apartment from Look Who's Talking (1989). I give it a 4.75/5, view trailer below:

Inferno (1980)

The sequel to Suspiria (1977) and the 2nd of Dario Argento's Three Mothers trilogy, Inferno, was also a collaboration between him and the other creator of Giallo cinema, Mario Bava. The involvement of Bava meant wonderful gothic imagery (candelabras cats and gothic architecture) the special effects were great and actually endangered the crew in many different ways (being burnt to death, clawed to death by cats, or eaten by rats). The film also had a pretty cool soundtrack, by one of my favorite musicians, Keith Emerson of Emerson Lake and Palmer. The sets and cinematography also resemble that of Suspiria a bit, and the acting is good, BUT there are some big logic and plot holes in it, and that is why I do not give it a higher rating. Argento loves to throw in crazy stuff to confuse the audience so they won't get bored with the film, or know what's coming next; while Hitchcock or Agatha Christie may be able to due that to their audience while maintaining logic, continuity and context, Argento just throws in red herrings without necessarily having any explanation for them. I give it a 3.75/5. The film is available to stream for free on Hulu, view the trailer below:

Mystery Train (1989)

This is the third film by Jim Jarmusch that I've seen, and I found it spectacular. The film is a series of three vignettes that all occur in Memphis during the same night and eventually all the characters' stories overlap. The film mainly centers around two japanese teens who make a pilgrimage to Memphis to visit Graceland and Sun Studios where Elvis and so many early rock greats recorded. The film is a great late night viewing, it shows what goes on during the wee hours of the morning in the city of Elvis, and as a night owl it's always nice to watch a good "late night movie" every now and then. It's heartwarming at times, hilarious throughout, serious, and a good portrayal of some of life's confusions, struggles and hardships. At times shocking and surprising, but fun throughout. Listen to this cast: Tom Waits, Steve Buscemi, Screamin' Jay Hawkins (of I Put a Spell on You fame), Joe Strummer (lead singer of the Clash), and soul legend Rufus Thomas ("Do the Funky Chicken" and "Walk the Dog") Tom Noonan (Heat, the bad guy in The Last Action Hero) and Rick Aviles (the bad guy from Ghost), and with such a great cast of musicians you can bet the soundtrack is good too. I'm really beginning to love Jarmusch's stuff, this film is also on Criterion. I give it a 5/5, and I highly recommend it.

P.S. instead of showing the trailer here I will instead include one of my favorite scenes with Screamin' Jay Hawkins. Context for this scene: one of the japanese tourists gave the bellboy a special Japanese plum as a tip (they do not understand the concept of "tipping" in Japan):