The Stepfather (1987) original

I'd been meaning to see this one for a long time, but it's relatively hard to find. This film is amazing for several reasons: 1). It is based on the true story of this man John List, 2). It is one of the best psychological "mind of a killer"/"mind of a crazy person" movies ever made, 3). It is such an atypical "slasher" film I wouldn't even classify it as one, 4). The acting and production crew are amazing considering what a ridiculously low budget this film had, 5). It has two sequels and a remake. Though Terry O'Quinn is not a household name, most people will recognize him as John Lock from the TV series Lost, but 20 years prior Terry gave the performance of a lifetime as The Stepfather. The Stepfather is based on real life murderer John List who killed his family, disappeared only to change his identity and join another family, it is debated by some that List might have done this more than once, just as the character is portrayed in the film. The Stepfather wants the perfect 1950s TV family and will do anything to make his dream come true, but when the realities of 1980s America and family troubles rear their ugly head, it becomes too much for the Stepfather to handle. So rather than try to work out the problems his family has, he'd just assume start all over again and get a new family. This film is so effective because the character is so strong and the whole movie revolves around the character, making it possible for the

audience to at times even be sympathetic towards the psychopathic killer, making the movie much more than your average slasher flick. The plot bears some resemblance to The Shinning, but just superficially, this film is based on a true story, and it does not have Kubrick's trademark lengthy pacing. The film also boasts several great technical aspects, such as wonderful lighting and atmosphere, and overall cinematography (there are some really great camera movements and angles in this one). The director Joseph Reuben did several other films with a great atmosphere to them like Sleeping With The Enemy (1991) Dreamscape (1984, AKA as Inception 20 years before its time), and one of my favorites, The Good Son (1993). The Director of Photography went on to create the great visual look seen in movies like Field of Dreams (1989), Father of The Bride (1991), Pleasantville (1998), The Serpent and The Rainbow (1988), as well as The Good Son and Sleeping With The Enemy. The music of the film is notable for being made by Patrick Moraz, the one time keyboardist for the progressive rock band Yes. This film was not too successful on its initial release in theaters, but it did develop a big cult following and become relatively successful upon its VHS release. The film inspired two sequels and a 2009 remake, showing that the effect the film had both on the industry and on those who've seen it, is a lasting one. Also the movie does a great job of turning harmless "nice family" cliches into great horror lines, like: "You shouldn't drop by without calling first." This one is also on Bravo's list of 100 Scariest Movie Moments, and I give it a 5/5. You can view the trailer below:

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) original

Another one that almost single-handedly changed the horror genre. As I mentioned before in my Black Christmas review, 1974 was a big year for horror, Black Christmas redefined the slasher genre making  the birth of movies like Halloween (1978) possible, and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre made eventually led to the birth of the extremely gory violent and scary horror movie. Texas Chainsaw along with Black Christmas were the first two horror films to create "the lone girl" formula (where a single female always survives)for horror films to come, Chainsaw was also the first film to feature the killer running full speed after his victims instead of walking at a slow pace, and it was also the first horror film to have the majority of it take place in the daytime. Also though you may walk away from the film thinking you've just seen a bloodbath, there's very little actual gore in the film (a lot of it just appears or was already in the background). For those who do not know about the film, the general plot is that five hippies go out for a drive and get lost/find an old house and go exploring, the five friends then run into a chainsaw wielding maniac named Leatherface and his demented cannibalistic family. The movie is not based on a true story despite what the film and advertising says, but it was inspired by the real life crimes of Ed Gein and Charles Manson. Now if you were to just look at the movie for all those reasons alone the film would be great, but that would be disregarding about 90% of the film's greatness. Arguably the real horror and greatness that came from this movie involved/was due to the horrendous infamous conditions of the film's production. The acting in the film was great and one of the reasons why the film was as successful as it was, but a large percent of the performances, were not acted. A lot of the scenes when you see people getting beat with brooms or other objects, those actors were actually beaten full force. The scene where the actress limps away from Leatherface after jumping out of a one story window? That was real too, in order to get a better shot the film crew made about an eight foot tall ramp for the actress to run and jump off of, through the window, and when she landed she hurt her leg badly, but she decided to continue filming anyway. All the animal bones, bodies, and furniture aroundthe house? Those

were all real too and constructed by the film's art director who went out driving around the highways of Texas scouring for roadkill, and then would bring it back to make all the film's "creations" out of it. The crazy hitch-hiker? In the documentary found on "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre:2-disc Ultimate Collection," titled Flesh Wounds, the actor who plays the Hitch-hiker admits to actually being Schizophrenic. The insane cackling the actress does on the back of the truck at the end? That was real too, she explains that she was having a nervous breakdown at that point in filming due to the fact that she had to re-shoot some of the most difficult scenes to film (including the one where she hurt her leg) because of technical problems. Also in the scene where

 Leatherface hits the guy with a hammer, one of the actors expressed that he was almost struck by the hammer. And the obnoxious Franklin character? He stayed in character even when they weren't filming so as to create real dislike between himself and the other characters. On top of all that the shooting of the film is notorious for the conditions it was filmed under, it was filmed during a record breaking heatwave in Texas history with almost a month of days with the temperature over 100 degrees, plus when filming on the set all the lights added about another 20 degrees of heat, which lead to the animal carcasses rotting and stinking to the point of making several people on the production (including the actor who played Leatherface) vomit multiple times. Most of the Actors and Actresses only had one costume too say during the whole three plus weeks of filming in the severe heat, they couldn't wash their clothes, or even bath so they could retain their character's gritty "look". Also at one point they had more animal carcasses lying around than they knew what to due with, so director Tobe Hooper told the crew to burn them, so the  horrible smell of burning rotting animal flesh was detectable for miles. The most grueling part of the shootthough was agreed upon by everyone involved to be the dinner scene, which was a 27 hour long shoot. The actor who played the hitch-hiker said in Flesh Wounds, that he had personally lead soldiers into combat several times in Vietnam, and that that was not as harrowing of an experience as shooting the dinner scene was.

Also all the blood that was poured in the main actresses hair at the end, permanently stained her hair for life. Also once the film did get successful the actors never got any of the royalties because of the contract they had with the film company that produced the film (which just happened to have ties to the mafia), honestly checkout the documentaries on that 2-disc collection if you're interested in hearing more, they're quite good.But despite all the hardships the film and crew went through, someone could argue the end product was worth it. The director, Makeup artist, and set/art director and cinematographer all went on to successful and award winning careers. The film opens at the beginning by talking about some mutilated bodies that are described as "a grisly display of art," which is exactly how I would describe the film. It is at once extremely disturbing and yet gorgeous. The cinematography, unique camera style, and gorgeous sunsets make the film gorgeous to look at, and the set is so distinct that it is essentially another character in the film. (Fun fact: the set was an actual house, and it is open to the public today as a restaurant in Texas.) And the rest is history, the film became a massive success at Drive-ins and such and spawned several sequels and remakes as well launched the career of Tobe Hooper, one of my all time favorite directors. At this point I think it's pretty obvious what my opinion of the film is, most people will say this is one of the greatest Horror films of all time, if not the greatest, I wouldn't say it's the greatest but I'd say it's probably in the top 5. I give it a 5/5. I've decided not to include the trailer because it shows every single famous/scary scene from the film, so instead here's the segment from Bravo's 100 Scariest Movie Moments where they talk about the film:

Assault on precinct 13 (1976) original

This is John Carpenter (legendary horror director)'s second film, he still hasn't made a horror movie at this point yet. His first film was a Sci-fi comedy (Dark Star [1974]), and this one is an action/crime-thriller. The movie does feel like a horror movie at times though. The film is about a police precinct that is being moved across town in L.A. California. The film takes place on the precinct's last day of operation. A police officer on his first day on the job is assigned to watch over the precinct for its final 24 hours. The trouble begins however when a gang who recently had several of its members killed/arrested by cops from precinct 13, decide to get revenge, and attack the precinct. There are only five people trapped inside left to fend off the seemingly endless hordes of criminals trying to get in and kill them all.  The movie is really similar to Night of the Living Dead (1968). The protagonist in both films is black, there are only four to five people trapped inside trying to fend off seemingly endless hordes of inhuman monsters (the criminals in Precinct are completely dehumanized and never talk while they are attacking, and the audience is completely disconnected from them), and the trapped people in both have an argument about retreating to the basement. The movie also has a stellar 80s-esque score (composed by Carpenter) that helps intensify the mood. I really did enjoy this one, pretty much everyone knows John Carpenter for his horror movies (Halloween, The Thing, etc.) but this was the first of his action movies (Big Trouble in Little China, Escape

 from New York, They Live) and it's good, but what is most striking about it to me is how 

funny it is. People tend to overlook the comedy element of Carpenter's movies but so many of them are so funny, and in my opinion this is his funniest; Here's an example: A secretary in the station is pouring the new police officer a cup of coffee and asks "Black?" meaning "would you like your coffee black?" and the African American officer responds smiling "Have been for over 30 years!" This being an early film of Carpenter's, there are no big name stars (but the little girl from Escape to Witch Mountain [1975] is in it) in it. Apparently this film was remade in 2005 with Ethan Hawke and Laurence Fishburne. This is an all around great thriller, looks great, sounds great, is written great and acted great. The only thing it could have done better to make a full-fledged action flick instead of one with a horror vibe, would have been to develop the enemy's character more, instead of them being faceless and nameless. I give it a 4.5/5. This film is available to stream instantly on Netflix. You can view the trailer below:

Child's Play 2 (1990)

I've been meaning to write a review of this one for quite a while, I saw it a while ago and just never got around to it because I didn't feel as strong of an urge to write about this one as I did Black Christmas, or the original Child's Play, or Fright Night, or Badlands, or any of the other movies I really loved. This one was ok, better than the average horror movie sequel, but still on par to some of the other movies I've reviewed (or have seen but have yet to write about) is just ok. I liked that they kept the kid and Chucky as the same actors from the first movie. I also liked how this one was more humorous than the first (the sequels seem to get progressively funnier as they go). The plot is that the toy company who made the Good Guy dolls rebuilt the insidious Chucky to try aid their defense in court against the mother the police officers and the child, but they realize the error of their ways too late when Chucky kills some of the workers and escapes to go back to pursuing Andy from the first movie. This one is less believable than the first, and a little less scary than the first, but this one does have its moments.

The highlight of the film for me is no question the last 20 minutes or so when Chucky is chasing the kids through the maze of Good Guy dolls in the toy factory. Nothing is quite as scary as running away from a killer through a maze that has his face all over the walls. I also liked how this movie picked up right after the first Child's Play, just like Halloween 2, so that the sequel isn't a different story with one same character, but a continuation of the first story. Overall I give this a 3.75/5, it's better than most horror sequels, but I wouldn't classify it as one of the better sequels in the horror genre either. The movie is available to be streamed on Netflix, and you can watch the trailer below (You can also listen to the cheesy novelty song  they made to promote the series "The Chucky Rap", that I recently discovered, here):

Cemetery Man (1994) aka Dellamorte Dellamore

This film is kind of like a bridge between Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness, in my opinion. It is not as scary as Evil Dead II, but not as illogically funny as Army of Darkness. It's also similar to Shaun of the Dead (2004) in many ways, like the main character being British, the humor is similar, and there's a fat guy and skinny guy that are best friends and killing zombies. This movie is based on The Dylan Dog comics. Dellamorte is the caretaker of a Cemetery in Italy, where the died have a bad habit of rising a week after their death. The feel of the film is a mixture of neo noir, zany black comedy, horror, and a cynical look at love and life. The romance part of the film is similar to that of the original TV show Dark Shadows, in that the main character keeps finding different incarnations of his lost love. This

one has a huge cult following, but I liked it less and less as the film progressed. The film starts off as interesting and funny, and the main character is likable and easy to be empathetic with, but the character does a 180 in the last 15 minutes of the film, and though it is believable that he would be crushed and cynical at that point, I did not find it believable that he would make the decisions that seemed SO far out of his character, even if he was crushed. I also thought this was going to be more of an adventure film but the horror and comedic aspects of the film seem to be just a distraction from what the director intended to be the meat of the picture, which is his musings on love and death.So what I did dislike of the film was its indecisiveness with its plot (the plot seems to switch at times which makes it seem like you're watching several different movies with the same characters, which though interesting, I felt was poorly executed), its feel, and the convictions of its characters, but because both life and death are unpredictable it still kind of works. It is pretty funny at times, and the acting is well done. So I give it a 4/5, you can view the trailer below:

Raw Meat (1973) aka Death Line

Another influential and ahead of its time horror movie, Raw Meat would pave the way for countless stories about underground mutants killing people in the subways, like C.H.U.D.(1984), (see my review) Creep (2004), and Clive Barker's short story and film The Midnight Meat Train (2008), and even The Descent (2005) takes a page from this film's book. When an important member of the British government goes missing in a subway station, the local police force takes the matter into their hands, and a somewhat manic Donald Pleasance (The Great Escape, Halloween) leads the investigation. Sir Christopher Lee also makes an appearance in the film, though his is much smaller. It turns out the lone survivor of a group of construction workers that got stuck in the subway tunnels many years ago (for so long

  that the survivors resorted to cannibalism and inbreeding to survive) is responsible for the recent disappearances and murders in the subway. This movie is surprisingly funny, Donald Pleasance is a real hoot, and there are also times when the audience is called to feel empathy or even sympathy for the cannibal killer, (and it is rather effective at doing so), and then of course there are times when the film's atmosphere (dark London subways) is very disturbing/unsettling  and freaky. This film was ahead of its time for the amount of graphic detail and gore it shows. There are some plot holes if you look hard enough and try to scientifically analyze everything, but you shouldn't be doing that for this film anyway. I thoroughly enjoyed it even though I don't like gore (the gore is ahead of its time but not necessarily a lot by today's standards), I would recommend watching this one in total darkness though, because I watched almost the whole thing with a light on, and then turned it off for the last 20 minutes or so, and it was a lot freakier in the dark.The monster could have seemed less human  Also you'll never think of/hear the line "Mind the doors!" the same way again. I give it a 4.25/5. This film is mentioned in Rue Morgue magazine's 200 Alternative Horror Films You need to See. You can view the trailer below:

Rollerball (1975) original

I wasn't expecting to like this as much as I did/do. The movie starts off by really showcasing the futuristic sport that it's about: Rollerball, which is like a combination of a roller derby, a chariot race and football. I'm not a sports guy, so the fact that the first 10-20 minutes of the film are nothing but coverage of the Rollerball game made me lose interest pretty quick. Don't get me wrong I enjoy the action of the game and those scenes later on in the film (they get more and more violent each time they play, and I read somewhere that this film contains some of the more violent stunts ever put to film), but those scenes are more enjoyable as we learn more about the main character (played by James Caan) and are emotionally invested in the character and what happens to him, the first scene is basically just designed to showcase what the game is and how it's played. Though the action is great and the visuals are dated something fierce, the true appeal of this film lies in the realm of the philosophical. Rollerball is set in a futuristic dystopian society where corporations rule the world and control the masses. The corporations designed the sport of rollerball to demonstrate the futility of the individual and thus keep people living, acting and thinking in herds because groups are much easier to control than individuals. So in other words one team might be better than another, but no individual  player should be idolized (example: The Broncos vs. Peyton Manning), problems occur however when one Jonathan E. of the Houston team starts setting and breaking all records in the game. The fans become

obsessed with Jonathan and the corporations consequently want him to retire, when Jonathan refuses however the corporations keep changing the rules of the game to decrease the likelihood of Jonathan's survival in the game, even if it means killing all the other players in the process as well. In a world where the super bowl is as big of an event as it is (and considering that it is also controlled by the corporations who sponsor it), it's very easy to see some of the dangers of Rollerball paralleled in real life. One thing that is also illustrated in the film is "the man" trying to keep the people "down" and under control by taking away their education and ability to learn (all books have been processed into computers and nobody has access to them, or cares about them anymore) because sport is valued above knowledge. Some of the issues hit very close to home with current problems in society. Rollerball can also be taken deeper too in the sense that Jonathan goes on a sort of moral/spiritual/personal quest to find meaning in his life and "what's it all about?" by asking one of the future's super computers (think Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Another interesting way to look at Rollerball is that it is a futuristic commentary on communism/socialism. Ultimately though Rollerball is about the triumph of the human spirit/will in adverse circumstances. A surprisingly intellectual film under the guise of an action movie, and enjoyable as both, it is interesting that Rollerball has become the cult classic that it is. The acting is top notch from supporting actors John Houseman (in one of his best known roles) and knighted English actor Sir Ralph Richardson, not to mention James Caan giving one of the best performances of his career. As I mentioned before though, the visuals have dated, and the film does drag a little at times, but it is relatively easy to follow, and though it is deep it is not verbose. It is also worth mentioning this is one of the many sci-fi stories that influenced the ever so popular Hunger Games series, and that the film was remade in 2002.  I give this one a 4.5/5, you can view the trailer below:

Ravenous (1999)

Make no mistake, this film is messed up. Ravenous takes place in the 1800s during the Mexican-American war. The story is set at a military outpost in the mountains of northern California. A man who has been wandering through the wilderness for 3 days arrives at the outpost telling the men about the misfortune he has suffered since embarking with his family to California. He and the rest of his party got stuck in the mountains ran out of food, ate all their horses and oxen, and then eventually started eating each other (based on true story of the donner party). The man then tells the soldiers that there are still two people alive trapped in the cave and he begs them to go look for them, the soldiers comply and follow the man to the cave only to realize no one was left alive and that they just walked into a trap. This film is very different, it is a period piece, but because of its quick editing and Tarantino-esque grittyness ( as well as a semi rock soundtrack and a very high David Arquette, and Guy Pearce in the lead role) this film has a definite distinct 90s feel. The formula for the film is two parts horror, one part morality tale, and one part black comedy (this is the darkest of dark humor). The tagline for the film: "You are who you eat" pretty much says it all, of all the films out there about cannibalism that I know of though, I would have to say this is the most well made of them all (from a technical aspect). The film also has some really good twists in it and it is very psychological, but in a way that challenges everything you've ever been taught about what's right and wrong, and I didn't really like that to say the least. If cannibal movies are your thing though by all means give this one a watch, but it was a bit too disturbing for my taste (no pun intended), so much so that I found myself still disturbed by it days after seeing it. I give it a 5/5 for how well made it is, but weighing my actual enjoyment of the film a give it a 3.5/5; You can view the trailer below:

Shock Waves (1979)

I don't have a lot to say about this one. It's about a small cruise of people (think Gilligan's Island) getting stranded on an island that was once used to experiment on Nazi soldiers to try create the perfect soldier that couldn't die, and could also survive/attack underwater. So yes this could quite possibly be the only film about underwater Nazi zombies, and Peter Cushing (Star Wars episode IV, Horror of Dracula, Dr. Who) is the Nazi commander who used to be in charge of the zombie operation. The only other notable names in the movie are John Carradine (Grapes of Wrath, The Howling, The Sentinel [1970s version] several dracula films), and Brooke Adams (Days of Heaven, The Dead Zone). The movie is a low

budget flick with a similar feel to a Roger Corman flick from the 70s: very gritty, limited makeup or costume effects, and film mostly during the day. The movie has some pretty good POV scenes as well as zombie stalking scenes shot underwater. The zombies are always creepy whenever they're shown too because they do everything in unison. The acting is all pretty well done considering the plot's premise and the movie's budget. The last notable thing that should be mentioned about the film is how wonky its soundtrack is. The film has a lot of very ominous unusual synthesizer tones that are at sometimes very slow and heavy, and at others super frantic and high pitched creating a near fever-dream of an atmosphere that is very effective for creating a very fitting atmosphere for this film (it's really similar to another little known classic 70s horror Let's Scare Jessica to Death[1971]). My only problem with this film though is that it does tend to drag in some spots and seem rather boring at times, so I give it a 4.25/5. You can view the trailer below:

Dean Spanley (2008)

This film is based on the novella My Talks with Dean Spanley by Lord Dunsany. It is set in turn of the century England among the middle to upper class and is about an English man who meets once a week with the town's new minister/priest who has an interesting stance on the concept of  reincarnation. The film was made in New Zealand and stars Peter O'toole in one of the better performances to come out of the latter end of his career, and Sam Neill as the Dean. This is very unique and I found it very refreshing. At first glance it looked like an intellectual film about people meeting to talk about reincarnation, but that's only the best description I can give without ruining the surprise of the film, even though that description isn't the most accurate. I feel this film is best to go in fairly cold to, in other words don't read much about it and only see the trailer if you must (you might be able to figure it out from there, but I wasn't), because the whole thing that makes this film so fresh and unique is best to discover on your own as the main character discovers it half way through. This film is full of wonderful quotes like "I wonder if one can be a dog and not have fleas." This film can be taken very seriously and analyzed very deeply (there's tons of symbolism) but it can also just be enjoyed superficially without thinking too deeply about things, it's really funny in parts, and very heartwarming without being corny or cheesy.  If you like Downton Abbey, I'd say give this a chance, but on that note you don't have to like Downton Abbey to like this (admittedly I'm not an Abbey fan). The film has an 85% critic approval rating and an 80% audience approval rating on rotten tomatoes.com, and I give it a 5/5.  You can view the trailer below:

The Ward (2010)

The Ward is the latest film directed by one of my favorite directors, John Carpenter. It is a story about four or five girls in their teens/early 20s, living in a special security ward in an insane asylum during the 1960s. A new girl arrives and quickly learns this ward is no normal place. The film has wonderful cinematography, wonderful creepy hospital atmosphere, as well as a really nice 60s feel to it at times (a highlight is a dance scene in the ward set to a sixties vinyl single playing on the phonograph). The acting is also really good, but this movie is far from perfect. A lot of the scares in the film are given away by the musical score, or are just really predictable/cliche at times. The movie's mystery does remain a mystery for most of the movie, but I felt the ending was fairly anticlimactic as well as fairly predictable. This movie goes from an interesting compelling unique story to almost a "cop out" of a psychological thriller. The film turns out to be similar to another film I've reviewed on this blog called Identity (2003). There aren't any big name stars in this one, but all of the girls are fairly recognizable from various movies and TV shows made within the last ten years. This film is available to stream on Netlfix, and  I give this one a 3.25/5, 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:

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:

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:

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'"):

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: