Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994 film)

Copyright: TriStar Pictures

Day 3 and we're checking out the Francis Ford Coppola produced film Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.  Two years after Dracula proved a hit, they decided to update another literary classic with Mrs. Shelley's book.  A couple years after this one, the Jeckyll and Hyde retelling Mary Reilley was also made, so historical period drama mixed with gothic horror seems to have been rather big.

The film starts in the Arctic, with a ship on a difficult journey, the crew attempting to find a passage to the North Pole.  Following a number of particularly deadly events, the captain has his men trying to chop their way out, despite his first mate's warnings of threats of mutiny.  They hear an unearthly howl from the horizon.  A figure approaches from a distance through the blinding snow, startling the crew watching.  The howl rises again, and the sled dogs of the expedition break loose of their bindings, only to be killed by something unseen.

The man is taken to the Captain's quarters where, upon hearing the captain's goal, compares it to his own past ambitions.  The man introduces himself as Victor Frankenstein and beings to recount his history.  From here, we follow Victor from his childhood, with his loving mother, and introduction to his adoptive sister, Elizabeth, to his teenage years, with his mother's death in childbirth.  This loss is what spurs Victor to try his hand at conquering death.

The film is really amazing, how it interprets the events of the book.  Instead of lightning, Victor uses the electricity from a mass of electric eels, combined with electrodes hooked to various parts of the subjects body (in a version of acupuncture, of a sort).  No neck bolts used in this creation!  We also get to see the creature learning to read and speak from watching over a poor family outside of the town after he's chased from it.  All in all, though, it does follow the formula we know from the original film.

Robert de Niro portrays the Creation, and the makeup used here, again, is rather well-done.  His face does have the look of stitched together skin.  He is, of course, one of the best known actors, with films like The Godfather Part II, Raging Bull, Bloody Mama and Taxi Driver.  Kenneth Branagh pulled double duty here, both as director of the film and playing Victor Frankenstein himself.  He also did several Shakespearean adaptations, as well as Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and the much reviled Wild Wild West.  Helena Bonham Carter played the adult Elizabeth, Victor's love.  She's been in quite a few of Tim Burton's films, plus the Harry Potter series, Les Miserables, and the live action Cinderella.

I give the film a 4 out of 5.  It was fun, exciting, and mostly pretty faithful to the original Mary Shelley work.  Frankenstein Week's almost over, just two more films to go!  Until next time, take care, and this is Red Hawk signing out!

Roger Corman's Frankenstein Unbound (1990 film)

Copyright: 20th Century Fox

Day 2 of Frankenstein Week, and we're visiting one of the lesser known adaptations of Mary Shelley's work... and it even has Mary Shelley in it!  When I first saw the poster art for the film, I was immediately intrigued.  I knew Frankenstein had pieced his creature together, but I never thought about stitching parts of parts together, as shown with the patchwork eye there, but it works, and it also appears in the film!

The film starts in the future where scientist Joseph Buchanan is demonstrating an implosion weapon on a small model of the Statue of Liberty.  The test is a success, but shortly afterward, a strange cloud appears in the sky.  It seems testing this weapon is causing disturbances, including mysterious disappearances, and the strange clouds, called time slips.  As he returns to his home, he sees some children burying an old bike (the owner just got a new one).  As a time slip opens above the group, Buchanan tells the kids to run for his house, but two run towards the new bike.  Buchanan runs to them, yelling for them to get inside, but then gets caught up in the slip, himself, and pulled through.

Awakening, Joseph finds himself in the middle of a forest with his talking car.  Hiding the vehicle until he knows what's happening, Joe heads for the closest settlement he can find, receiving a few weird looks from the locals for his strange attire.  He heads for an inn, selling a ring for some local currency and buying a meal.  While waiting for his food, he notices a man reading a newspaper and moves closer, trying to figure out where and when he is.  The reader lowers the paper and starts talking to Joe, amazing at his digital watch, especially when he's told it runs on electricity.  Striking up a friendly conversation over science, Joe eventually discovers who his table mate is: Doctor Victor Frankenstein.

The film goes from here, with Joe not only meeting Frankenstein but his creation, as well, plus Lord Byron, Percy Shelley, and the author herself, Mary Shelley (under her maiden name, Godwin).  Joe's ultimate goal is to try to get back to his own time, especially when he sees the time slips have started manifesting here, as well.

This was a fun, interesting film.  The creature makeup is one of the most original I've seen, with the metal neck bolts being replaced with metal fins at his temples, the aforementioned multicolor patchwork eyes, and a rather unhealthy skin tone.  The creature is rather articulate, compared to the Karloff original, though not understanding of certain concepts, at least at first.

The sets were beautiful, with the film being shot in Italy.  There's a lot of wonderful architecture and beautiful forests.  The car that Joe Buchanan drove was interesting, as well, showing self driving and voice capabilities our cars are only now starting to develop.

John Hurt portrayed Joseph Buchanan, the temporal fish out of water who basically ignores the usual time travel prime directive (he even drives down the streets of Geneva in his car, with Mary Shelley riding with him, while people stare or flee).  He was also in Alien, played the War Doctor in Doctor Who, the Harry Potter series, and a LOT of other films.  This man is prolific!  Playing the good Doctor Frankenstein is the late, great, Raul Julia.  One of the best known and loved actors of all time, Julia's mainly known for his work as Gomez Addams in the Addams Family films, as well as M. Bison in the much-maligned Street Fighter opposite Jean-Claude Van Damme.

I give this film a 4 out of 5.  It's a favorite of mine, and I highly recommend it, but there are a few small things that keep me from giving it a perfect score.  At any rate, I liked it, and do hope others look for it to see if they do, too.  Until next time, this is Red Hawk signing out!

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992 film)

Copyright: Columbia Pictures

Today's entry in Dracula Week is a return to the original story, with a bit of a love story added on for good measure.  I always find it amazing how different the versions of the original story can be so different at times.  Bela Lugosi's film was different from Nosferatu.  Horror of Dracula took the story another direction, filling out the folklore even more, while the films with Frank Langella and Jack Palance playing the role added a bit more tragedy and romance to his backstory.  Each film builds on the back of those that came before it, taking what worked before and refining it, making it, in some cases, better.

With Bram Stoker's Dracula, Francis Ford Coppola took elements from the previous films, and the original book, blended them together, added some of his own inspirations and turned out a very interesting result, one I'm pleased to review for you.

The film starts off with a bit of history.  It shows Vlad the Impaler laying waste to the Muslim Turks that invaded his country in that time period.  It also shows his beloved, Elizabeta, getting news of his death and falling from a high tower to her death.  Upon his return, he's informed that, as she suicided, her soul's lost.  Vlad goes berserk, forsaking and renouncing God as he destroys everything in the chapel that he can.  Blood starts flowing from the stabbed cross and Vlad drinks from it.

From here, it follows much the same as the others.  We see Jonathan Harker, a realtor who replaces the recently mentally incapacitated Renfield, getting the assignment Renfield had, to finish the job of selling Carfax Abbey to Count Dracula.  Through the trip to Transylvania, we get Harker's journal entries (the film, much like the book, is told through journal entries and pieces of news).  On the ride to Borgo Pass, a fellow carriage rider gives Harker a crucifix to protect him.  When Dracula's coach arrives, the Coachman reaches down and lifts Harker up by the shoulder, setting him into the coach before driving off with him.

From here the film is close to the original, with the trip to the castle and the solicitor meeting with the Count.  Some interesting shots take place at the castle, with Dracula's shadow not quite matching Dracula's movements (a result of Dracula's own unnaturalness, along with a few other weird occurrences in the area).  Rather than falling under Dracula's spell as Renfield did, Harker is seemingly caught and captivated by Dracula's brides and forced to go along with Dracula's wishes.  Finally, the day comes where Dracula is set to head to his new home, leaving Harker with the brides.  He's seen Harker's fiancee's picture, and she looks remarkably like Elizabeta...

The film was amazing in its visuals and effects.  The makeup was excellent on Dracula, throughout all of the forms he takes.  The film was shot almost completely on sound stage, and with amazing attention to detail.  Many scenes were shot keeping in mind what sort of technology would be available in the time period, such as in the asylum scenes, or the nickelodeon.

The cast was, for the most part, excellently chosen.  A few people disliked Keanu Reeves's performance as Jonathan Harker, but I didn't really find any fault in it, personally (of course, I was in my teens when it first came out and never really thought much on different accents at the time).  Mr. Reeves was, of course, in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure and Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey, the Matrix series, Johnny Mnemonic and The Watcher.  Gary Oldman portrayed Count Dracula this time around, and he did excellently.  The different looks he sports throughout the film are amazing, but it's the actor that makes the role, not the makeup, and he was really good.  Mr. Oldman has been in a ton of movies, including the Dark Knight Trilogy, The Professional, The Fifth Element, the Harry Potter series and Red Riding Hood.  Winona Ryder plays Mina Murray, Harker's fiancee who starts to come under the spell of Count Dracula.  She was also in Beetlejuice, Heathers, Edward Scissorhands and Alien: Resurrection.  Anthony Hopkins plays Professor Van Helsing, the eternal nemesis to Dracula.  He's had a very long and distinguished career, portraying Hannibal Lecter in the Silence of the Lambs trilogy (not the first Hannibal Lecter on screen, that honor goes to Brian Cox who played the role (as Hannibal Leckter) in the Red Dragon adaptation Manhunter), as well as playing in Thor, Meet Joe Black, Instinct and Fracture.

All in all, an excellent movie, one I give a 5 out of 5.  Next up, we'll be going a few more years forward to the year 2000.  Dracula 2000, that is!  (At least I'm not covering Dracula 3000, the much-reviled vampires in space film!)  Until next time, this is Red Hawk signing out!

Mimic (1997 film)

Sometimes an insect will even mimic its predator. - Susan Tyler

Happy New Year, and welcome to the new start of Happy Horror!  Now, I know, you're probably thinking, "We just had a new start three years ago.  Why are you starting again?  Do we have to get ANOTHER review of the original Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street and Halloween?"  The answers are: Yes, we did; because I want to get a fresh start; and no, I'm not redoing those.  What I've done previously here stands on its own and I'm proud of that work.

However, every so often it's important to freshen up my work, and I have some major ideas for this place.  I'll detail those ideas as I go, though, because today, I want to bring you an almost forgotten classic in Mimic.  Based off of a short story of the same name, Mimic is the story of a disease called Strickler's Disease that spreads through cockroaches, affecting children.  A scientist from the CDC, Susan Tyler, genetically engineers a new breed of insect called the Judas Breed designed to wipe the roaches out.

Jump ahead three years and we find a priest running for his life onto a rainy roof as something massive pounds on the door behind him.  As the priest's pursuer starts knocking the door loose, the priest himself runs to jump to another building but finds the way too far.  The door busts in and a figure approaches him in the rain, getting closer and closer, finally pushing the Asian priest off the edge of the building and onto the street below to his death.  Meanwhile, a young, possibly autistic, boy observes the prone priest, seeing and naming the make, color and size shoes the priest has on from the view of his upper floor apartment.  As another figure approaches the priest's body, a strange clicking sound can be heard, which the boy imitates with a pain of spoons.  The figure drags the priest's body away as the little boy, Chuy, remarks, "Funny shoes."

The film was a fun ride.  I received it for Christmas in a 3-pack with its two sequels (which I'll also be covering).  The story, about giant bugs that can (barely) pass themselves off as human is an interesting concept.  The effects work well, both practical and CG, and the acting is great.  Mira Sorvino played Susan Tyler, the scientist who created the bugs and is called on when the Judas Breed makes an unexpected reappearance.  Miss Sorvino's first film role was an uncredited part in The Stuff, she also was in The Summer of Sam and The Final Cut.  Her father, Paul Sorvino, played the villain Rotti Largo in one of my favorite movies, Repo: The Genetic Opera.  Charles S. Dutton plays Officer Leonard Norton, a subway cop who initially blocks Susan's efforts to research, but ultimately helps out.  He was also in Alien 3, Stephen King's Cat's Eye, Surviving the Game, Seven and many others.  F. Murray Abraham played Dr. Gates, Susan's superior, who first grasps the danger of the Judas Breed situation.  A long established actor, some of his genre films include Thir13en Ghosts, Blood Monkey and Shark Storm.

I give this film a 4 out of 5.  I enjoyed it a lot, and it was a great start to what was, ultimately, a short series.  In 2010, director Benicio del Toro announced he was working on a director's cut of the film, which he released September 6, 2011.  I haven't seen that cut, yet, but I hope to find it sometime and see how it differs from the original finished product.  Tune in next time, where we'll cover the sequel, Mimic 2.  Until next time, as always, this is Red Hawk signing out!

The Boogeyman (1980) and Return of the Boogeyman (1994) - Joint Review

So, sorry for the extremely long delay in posting this.  I'm going to do my best to salvage the rest of the month, and to cover what I meant to cover in the weeks following.  This was intended to go up the third and fourth of this month, but due to the convention I went to, plus an unexpected allergy, I was down for a little bit and then got sidetracked with other things, so everything got pushed back more and more.  But, I'm ready to finish off the week!

So, this post finds us with a supernatural slasher, 1980's film The Boogeyman, and its 1994 sequel, Return of the Boogeyman.  There was another sequel in there, The Boogeyman II, but I didn't get a chance to see that one.  The Boogeyman took a bit of flack from critics for supposedly cribbing stuff from Halloween and The Exorcist.  Were there similarities?  Maybe a few.

The film begins with two kids, Willy and Lacey, as they watch their mom getting a bit intimate with her boyfriend, whose head she covers with the panty hose she's wearing.  Seeing the kids watching through the window, she yells at them and the boyfriend grabs Willy and drags him to his room, tying him to his own bed and gagging him as Lacey watches on.  Soon afterwards, Lacey brings a knife in and cuts Willy free.  Willy and Lacey sneak up to the room where Mom and the boyfriend are still making out, him still wearing the panty hose on his head.  As Lacey watches in the mirror, Willy creeps up and stabs the boyfriend in the bed.

Twenty years later, the children have grown up into not-so-adjusted adults.  Willy hasn't spoken a word since that night (and has secretly been collecting sharp knives in his top drawer).  Lacey is married, with a little boy, but her guilt over the incident is starting to carry over into her everyday life.  Trying to find refuge in both religion and psychology, she freezes up during dinner when she spots a mirror.  A later encounter with the original mirror unleashes a murderous force on anyone in its vicinity.

I'm sort of on the fence with this film.  On the one hand, I was entertained by it, which is the goal of any movie out there, but I felt that it could have been more.  The climax is exciting, but not a lot happens leading up to it.  The rest of the film just felt like... buildup.  Other than the boyfriend getting stabbed, there aren't a lot of killings leading up to the finale, which causes the film to sort of drag on.  The film's villain felt less like a boogeyman and more like Death in Final Destination, except more outgoing and manipulative of events.  Some may say it's just a product of its time, but many films before and after it gave a better feeling to me than this one did.

Adult Lacey was portrayed by Suzanna Love, the wife of the director, Ulli Lommel, at the time, and also co-wrote the script with him.  She was also in The Devonsville Terror, BrainWaves and the original sequel, The Boogeyman II.  Her brother, Nicholas Love, played her brother, Willy.  He was also in Jennifer 8 and The Dead Pool.  Probably the most famous actor in the film is the late, great John Carradine, playing psychiatrist Dr. Warren who Lacey turns to to try to exorcise her mental demons.  His list of films is extremely long, with a few excerpts being The Monster Club (with Vincent Price), House of the Long Shadows (with Price, Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing), The Howling, and many more.

All in all, I give this film a 3 out of 5.  It was alright, but it could've been a lot better.  Now, the reason I decided to cover both of the films together is that they are extremely similar.  So similar that the sequel uses a lot of footage from the first film!  I figured I'd combine the film reviews like I did with Mystery of the Wax Museum and the original House of Wax last year.

So, The Return of the Boogeyman deals with a new woman, Annie, receiving psychic visions of the first film's events, along with flashes of current happenings.  The psychic visions take the form of the footage from the original movie.  In a way, it reminds me somewhat of the sequel to the original The Hills Have Eyes, which featured a LOT of flashbacks to the first film, as well.  Even the dog flashed back in that one!  Getting back to this film, Annie's been seeing what she calls the Faceless Man, really the Boogeyman from the first film still with the panty hose over his head.  A psychiatrist, Dr. Love, is trying to help her sort out her visions.  We only get one new kill in this film, with all the other deaths happening in footage from the first one.

There are some surface flaws that keep this movie down, most of which is the narration of the previous events.  Lacey gets a new name, Natalie, from Annie as she looks to the past, and the aunt and uncle her and Willy were staying with are referred to as her parents (even though we see her mother in the flashbacks to the opening scenes of the film).  A lot of this could be explained as Lacey considering her aunt and uncle as parents since they did raise her and her brother; also, the name change could be chalked up to what she thought Lacey's name was, like a miscommunication in how her psychic link works.  However, these explanations are never given and that leaves a bit of confusion: one wonders if the original names were forbidden from use in this one, even though the same guy directed it.

All said, this is a rather mediocre effort.  I hate to do it, but I give the film a 2 out of 5.  The presentation of the original film again (something that was also done in The Boogeyman II, apparently) wrapped up in very little new footage just didn't work for me.  So, that concludes my reviews of The Boogeyman films.  If I get a chance to see The Boogeyman II (aka, Revenge of the Boogeyman), I'll be sure to add it to the site.  Until next time, take care and this is Red Hawk signing out!