13 Days of Hallowe'en 2019 Day 12

Day 12

movie: Friend Request
starring: Alycia Debnam-Carey, Brooke Markham
genre: Horror,
year: 2016
format: Netflix Canada

plot: After accepting a friends request on facebook, Laura, the most popular girl on campus becomes the latest obsession of the school's outcast Mia. Things quickly become stressed as Laura finds herself stalked by Mia and unfriends her profile, who then commits suicide live on camera. Before long, Laura's friends begin to die one by one in horrific ways.

I thought I was getting just another creepy stalker film, but it ended up becoming a ghost story. So bonus. I have to admit too, that this one made me jump a few times. Yes, there are a lot of old fashioned jump scares in it, and they work.

You've got a few things going on here. The obvious, which is the whole cyber stalking/bullying issue, and the psychological effects/side effects of how jacked-in society has become. When you strip away the paranormal elements of the story, you are left with just as scary a one. The fact that from a day to day stand point, social media allows people to get personal without getting too close, is scary all on it's own. Add to that the growing number of people with anxiety issues who find it easier to live "online" than it is in reality; and you've got the perfect cocktail to build upon.  And build upon it does.

If you remove the reality based story and simply go with the paranormal elements; then you've got a really great ghost story that has some cliched ideas that come across as fresh and new. The orphan who's family died in a mysterious fire, the occult, and a haunting.

Jealousy is used as a weapon in this. From Laura's boyfriend who feels insecure towards her best male friend, to the actual idea that one media profile is something to covet.

I am going to bury this one here in the graveyard. I'll be back tomorrow with one last treat for your Hallowe'en displeasure.

13 Days of Hallowe'en 2019 Day 11

Day 11

movie: Wishmaster 2 Evil Never Dies
starring: Andrew Divoff, Holly Fields
genre: Horror, Comedy
year: 1999
format: TV Edit

plot: When an art thief accidentally releases a centuries old djinn, she finds herself in the middle of a prophecy trying to return him to his prison.

This is a made for tv/straight to video sequel.

This is suppose to be a horror film, but like so many movies that were released between 1997 and 2012, it plays more like a comedy. The moments it hits the horror is sadly with too much of the gore factor and not really what I consider horror. The story itself is pretty much been done to death and I actually found myself cheering on the djinn played by Divoff.

Honestly, the idea is there, I just felt it was lost under the typical religion vs the world thing that horror films have fallen prey to so often.

Divoff is about the only bright spot in this. He plays the villain as the straight man in what feels like a bad comedy duo. The fact the djinn begins paling around with a Russian mobster begins to make the audience believe he's softened, as the movie begins to dip into buddy comedy territory. Which, plays better than the rest of the plot of bringing on the end of days.

I'm going to bury this here in the graveyard. I'll be back tomorrow with another treat for your Hallowe'en displeasure.

13 Days of Hallowe'en 2019 Day 9

Day 9

movie:  Plan 9
starring: Brian Krause, Mr. Lobo
genre: Comedy, Horror, Sci-Fi
year:2014/2015
format: TV Edit

plot: After a meteorite strikes the earth, a small town is overrun by zombies, with only a handful of survivors making it through the night.

This is a remake of the 1959 cult-classic Plan 9 From Outer Space.  I have to say, this was really good given it's an independent remake of one of the most famous movies known to man. This version of the story is 50% Plan 9 From Outer Space, 50% every other zombie movie you've seen in the last 50 years. I kept thinking about Return of the Living Dead while watching this. I found this version of the story to be more complete, smarter and also easier to follow.  Besides the baseline story of Plan 9, you get a few little nods through out, like seeing a model spaceship and graveyard that our lead scientist is for some reason playing with.  They even managed to get Conrad Brooks, who at the time was the last living actor from the original Plan 9 movie.

Where it sort of leaves Plan 9 and becomes it's own movie, is with the science behind the story, as well as the wonder twins of doom...er the aliens. By giving them a more fleshed out...no pun intended...back story you get where this version is able to stand on it's own.  And can I say, I'll forever think of this movie whenever I see baby food or apricot jam again.

Where as, I've always considered the original Plan 9 to be more a vampire movie than zombie mostly because of the way it was shot, you know this is straight up zombie gore. There's no hiding the intention of the film makers here.  I've had to sit through enough zombie genre films in the last few years to know this one is worth checking into. And if you've followed me much at all over the years, you know the zombie genre is still one I'm only lukewarm towards.

I'm going to bury this one here in the graveyard. I'll be back tomorrow with another treat for your Hallowe'en displeasure.

13 Days of Hallowe'en 2019 Day 8

Day 8

movie: Holiday Hell
starring: Jeffery Combs, Joel Murray
genre: Comedy, Horror
year: 2019
format: TV Edit (Tubi)

plot: 4 short stories about cursed objects/murder weapons told in an occult shop.

This is done in the same vein as Tales From the Crypt, Are You Afraid of The Dark, RL Stine etc. And I have to say, this was the best thing I've seen so far this week for my Hallowe'en week. I mean, you've got a drunk paranoid husband who slaughters everyone at x-mas, a deranged teenaged serial killer, a golem and a coven of angry witches. And Jeffery Combs. Everything is better when Jeffery Combs is in it!

The movie starts off with Combs's character about to close his shop for the long weekend, when a customer comes in, and quickly the set up for the first story is given. It centers around a broken mask that had belonged to the teenager who wanted revenge on her classmates. The second story is about a wooden doll that was brought to life by a little boy. The third centers around a santa suit that had been worn the night a jealous husband killed his rivals. And the final story about a fertility cult who raise the dead. That last one also ties up the ending of the film by interacting with the Combs's character.

I thought this movie was well thought out and the creep factor is there without getting too gory;
although, I felt the first segment is the weakest link. Given the amount of time each piece had, this one takes way too long to set it's pace and actually dive into it's story.   The third segment was the most realistic, therefore I remembered the most. An executive who gets his hands on an experimental drug blacks out and goes on a killing spree. Dude, that's down right nerve racking because it could happen.

I'm going to bury this one here...in the front yard near the pumpkin patch. I'll be back tomorrow with another treat for your Hallowe'en displeasure.

13 Days of Hallowe'en 2019

Spudguns!, it's Saturday the 19th of October, which means Hallowe'en week officially begins today.  I thought it would be great to sink our fangs into a 13 day movie post.  That's right, back to the roots of the blog, for the next week and a half, I'm going to post one movie a day. Groovy right?

Day 1:

movie: Gingerdead Man (13 Nights of Elvira version)
starring: Gary Busey, Robin Sydney
genre: Comedy, Horror,
year:2006
format: online

plot: When a serial killer vows revenge on the one person who turned him in, his soul is reborn in a cookie that wrecks havoc on a small town.

Okay, this is pretty straight forward, and is a direct rip off of the Child's Play movies. There isn't a whole lot of story going on here, in fact even with the classic Elvira intro/extro and interruptions, this movie was barely 80 minutes.  The jokes are as stale as they are raunchy, and at times don't even fit with the tone of the scene. Such as one of the characters being hit over the skull with a fry pan before being forgotten for half the movie, only to be found covered in whipped cream. I get that the killer is a giant cookie, but even a direct food reference should have had more of a set up for the joke.

The end of the film, has the "hero", who by the way is on screen for about 4 minutes; get killed. Yeah, sorry opps spoiler alert but yeah he does. He eats the evil gingerdead man and becomes possessed himself.  Now, correct me if I'm wrong in thinking, if the dead dude in the cookie could possess people simply by having them eat him, wouldn't he have forced someone to bite into him sooner? I mean, the gingerdead man spends half the movie stuck in a bakery with limited abilities, and the second someone takes a bite out of him he has triple the powers. 

The plot is thin even for Full Moon Features. Who, by the way, are still the best at low budget films. The characters themselves are less than one dimensional, and deliver their lines like paper weights.

Honestly, I found the addition of Elvira's intro/extro the funniest part of the script for this; and feel this is one time Full Moon Features dropped the ball. To say Gingerdead Man is half baked is an understatement.  Since this is the "hosted by Elvira" version of the movie (2014 on her show) , I have to comment on the sketch she does. It's her baking cookies and eating them. Which, given the material she had to try to work with this time around, pulled together nicely. The jokes weren't over the top nor were they extremely memorable, but they fit the plot better than some of the jokes in the movie itself.

Okay, I'm going to bury this one here. In this unmarked grave. And I'll be back tomorrow with another treat for your Hallowe'en displeasure.

Random Movie: Slaughterhouse Rulez

movie: Slaughterhouse Rulez
starring: Simon Pegg, Nick Frost
genre: Comedy, Horror, Action
year: 2018
format: Crave

plot:  When a group of students at a boarding school discover that the Headmaster has sold off half the property to a drilling company, they put their differences aside in order to fight off a herd of giant subterranean slugs.

You've got three distinct groups here, represented by the three big names, Simon Pegg's character representing the school/students, the Headmaster played by Michael Sheen who represents the government/corporation, and the Nick Frost character who represents a group of environmentalist activists. Pegg's character is the buffering link between the extreme points of view of the other two. And that's about all you can say about the big names in the film, as they disappointingly, are not the lead characters.

As nice as it is to know that the name plates in the film have bowed down to the younger generation of actors, passing the torch, I was disappointed to learn this fact. Pegg, Frost and Sheen were the reasons I wanted to see this film. At times, you almost feel like they are a set up to a different story altogether.

I felt the comedic elements in this one were too shallow, and the main plot just a little light. The overall subject matter of this film is darker in nature, as a massive sub-plot (which I think should have been the main plot) deals with a few students who are bullied so badly that one commits suicide. Which we the viewer don't even learn until about midway into the film, and then the topic just seems to be forgotten.

The horror elements were handled well enough with a decent balance of gore and humour. Like Pegg/Frost's previous Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy, (which I've talked about in the past) the genre mash-up actually works well for the ever present theme of not being able to let go of something once it's run it's course. In this case, Pegg's character not being able to admit his girlfriend has dumped him; and Frost's character still grieving over his brother's death 20plus years later as if it had just happened.

June book report

It's that time again, where I tell you my thoughts on this month's book club selection.  The book in question was Gerald's Game by Stephen King. I know there is a movie version too, but I decided not to watch it.

plot:  After being talked into an afternoon of S/M style sex, a woman is left alone when her husband dies suddenly of a heart attack. She then starts to doubt everything she sees while waiting for help.

I liked the majority of this novel, up to the last couple of chapters. The introduction of the Boogieman/Joubert sort of put me off the rest of the story.  Which, I think might have been the whole idea of the character.  Up to that point in the story, you are dealing with the lead Jessie, and a stray dog named Prince.

I was expecting a completely different ending than what we are actually given. The story itself takes place over about 72 hours, as we sit with the lead character in her isolated misery. She is faced with the realization that no one is coming to help her, and she needs to help herself. While this is happening, she starts to hallucinate and hear voices. The voices are what gets her through and reveals why she's there in the first place. We learn that she had been abused as a child, and her way of dealing is by not dealing.

The stray dog, which I thought was a brilliant point of view to have, helps to break up the interior dialog. He's the grounding point in the little bit of reality Jessie has left to hold on to. And again, here is another character that has survived a form of abuse.

One of the voices Jessie hears is that of Ruth, her best friend from college. It's hinted at one point that she was actually hearing the voice of Ruth shortly after the original abuse happens. I was fully expecting Ruth to be a split personality, but it didn't seem to play out that way in the final chapters.

Which brings me to the Boogieman/Joubert character. He turns out to be a deformed serial killer/cannibal. Again, another character who suffered abuse as a child.  When the character is first introduced, we are made to believe along with the lead, that he's not real. That he's part of Jessie's hallucinations. Which, made that point of the story creepy as hell. When we finally discover his piece of the story, it just degrades into such a disturbing sub-plot.

This twist ending with the Joubert character ruined the whole first half of the book for me. It grounded it, and took away all the "what if's" that surrounded Jessie's state of mind up to that point. 

Honestly, it was the ending that made me decide I did not want to sit through the movie.

I don't have much insight on this one. I loved the psychological elements with the isolation and the self-loathing confessions, but beyond that, the story itself almost felt like the ending belonged to a different book.

I'm going to end this here. I'll be back later in the week with the official announcement for the next book selection.

Random movie Waxwork

movie: Waxwork
starring: Dana Ashbrook, Zach Galligan
genre: Horror, Comedy,
year: 1988
format: DVD

plot: A group of teenagers decide to visit a wax museum at night, and find themselves the victims of a devious murder plot. The owner of the museum is using the displays as supernatural portals, and needs eighteen real bodies to finish his work.

This is one of those movies that tried to be too ambitious. You're never really sure what the end goal of the film itself is? Is it a commentary on the animal within (the werewolf, vampire and Marquis de Sade are the longest segments all having to deal with duality and repression) the fear of others (the staff of the museum are a pair of butlers - a midget with an authority issue and a mute strong man) a comment on greed (everyone is rich and the lead villain sold his soul to live forever) or is it something else all together?

As this does try to cover all sub-genres of the larger horror world; vampires/ghouls, zombies, aliens, werewolves, serial killers/psychos, cults etc. You sort of know that each segment of the story will be rushed, as they are only smaller segments of the larger story happening, but you want to linger on them and try to understand why they were used.  (Such as using the Marquis de Sade instead of Jack the Ripper to cash in on the fact Hellraiser had just been released.)

The sad part of this is, the film is really pretty good till the last ten minutes, when an angry mob of secret society members shows up to battle the reanimated wax works. Then it just looses all credibility and becomes a massive joke.

Random movie - Little Evil

Movie: Little Evil
starring: Adam Scott, Clancy Brown
genre: Comedy, Horror,
year: 2017
format: Netflix Canada

plot: As a new step dad, Gary is convinced is his new wife's son is more than a little troubled. After their wedding photographer points out the priest spoke backwards in the vows and instead of asking the normal wedding vows, asks Gary to look after the son instead, Gary and his best friend Al; begin to investigate. They soon learn that the boy Lucas was conceived during a cult ritual. Before they know it, all the dads in the neighbourhood have to band together to fight the cult leader and keep the devil from rising.

This was a cute film I found it to be less horror and more horror spoof, and I think it would have been a great launching pad for a tv series.  50% Omen, 40% Rosemary's Baby, and 10% nods to other horror classics like the Shinning and Amityville.

Sally Field has a small role as the child services worker/cult member, and the nod to her tv show The Flying Nun, was quick but there none the less.  This movie is actually pretty fast paced given the amount of story that they manage to get across without it feeling rushed. We learn that the wife has a bit of a checkered past with keeping a husband, as they all seem to either die or runaway.

The one tiny detail that stuck in the back of my mind after the movie was over, was the priest. If he never actually referenced the wife, only the kid, why was that never addressed? It's set up in the beginning of the film but then never even used as a joke or anything afterwards. 

Themed Day p6

March theme is Witches/Witchcraft. And yes, a day late this week but...

movie: Warlock
starring: Julian Sands, Richard E. Grant
genre: Horror, Drama, Paranormal,
year: 1989
format: DVD

plot: In the mist of the witch hunts of the 1600's, one male witch manages to time jump to save his life. The witch hunter follows, and begins trailing him. The two end up in the late 1980's where the male witch begins searching for the missing spellbook known as The Grand Grimoire. With the help of a young woman who's  now hexed by the witch, the hunter travels road trip style across the U.S. trying to find the book first.

This movie is an interesting mix of folklore and fiction. Remembering, this was done back in the 1980's, when anything dealing with witchcraft or the occult, was still considered slightly taboo and only for horror stories. That's also what makes it an interesting movie. Treating it as a horror story allowed them to not water anything down. But, at the same time, because of that factor, it's seen strictly from a Christian point of view. aka they make the witch the bad guy.

My biggest complaint aside from that, is there doesn't seem to be any "chemistry" between the character of Redferne, played by Richard E. Grant, and the character of Kassandra, played by Lori Singer. They just don't have any dynamics coming through. I get that the character of Kassandra is suppose to be a bit "plastic" given it's the late 80's and she's very much the typical 80's chick, and she's suppose to have some abrasiveness to her. But, with that said, they might as well have had the Grant character hiring different cab drivers to take him on his hunt. And his character seems a bit too well adjusted for someone who's just time traveled 300 years into the future.

I would have liked to have had more back story with the actual Warlock, as we're given some more on the Redferne character with him having lost his wife, but you're sort of left asking "is that the only reason he became a hunter?" Was there something else between these two in the 1600's?  And ever notice in these movies, the witch hunters who seem to condemn the idea of witchery always use it themselves to hunt the witches?   This sort of falls in line with the way the old Hammer films were styled back in the 1960's, with the hunter chasing down the vampire just because he was a vampire, and having to save the village; namely the virginal girl. Which, for a horror movie works.

Themed Day p5

Spudguns!, yes a few days late but as promised...

Movie:  Frankenstein Reborn
starring: Rhett Giles, Joel Hebner
genre: Horror, Thriller, Crime
year:2005/06
format: DVD

plot:While being evaluated to see if he's sane enough to stand trial for murder, Dr. Victor Franks, tells how he managed to regenerate a dead body.

This is done in a series of flashbacks-within flashbacks. And not always successfully either. It's a low-budget/no budget production that could have taken the first 45 minutes and condensed it down to about fifteen. The idea is there, as it takes the core of the original Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and tries to bring it forward to modern times. That's also where it gets muddled.

The doctor has been arrested for multiple murders, and is telling a therapist his story. (much like how Victor tells his story to the Captain in the original novel) We then learn that Franks and his team, were trying to create a system to help accident victims, who had been paralyzed. Their most successful patient is Bryce, a young man who has volunteered to undergo their experimental procedure. He ends up having a series of microbes injected into him. They manage to work to restore the use of his legs, but unknown to him, something else has come along with it. The doctor, who has been experimenting on himself, has managed to copy parts of his own personality, and that now effects Bryce, as the "donor" samples  retained emotions/memories. Bryce begins having these visions/nightmares about killing members of the medical staff. Unable to handle them, he gets into a fight with Franks, who then kills him. Franks learns he's about to lose his company's funding, and in a panic, begins upping his experiments. Bryce then becomes the canvas for which he experiments on.

This is one of those movies that halfway makes sense, and halfway just doesn't connect at all.  Like for example, the character of Bryce, once he becomes the creature. I am not sure why, but the doctor decides he needs to take apart a perfectly functioning body and rebuild it from scratch, mutilating the face and features in the process.  He goes from being an average man, to the Castle Freak.  And then later on, when he creates his female creature, there's only one small scare on her. I didn't get the point of that?

The two are emotionally connected by the experiment, which is why the creature is able to anticipate Franks whereabouts and just arrive there. For half the story, you get the idea the creature is doing his bidding, then it turns on him.  You have to assume that in his madness, the doctor loses the bond.

I know this is a low budget/no budget film from Asylum, but my biggest complaint is the sound. I wish they had put some extra time and effort into having a smoother soundtrack, as the quality cuts in and out every few minutes.

This is shown only from the character of Victor's point of view. So it's only the drive to make the creature, the madness, and the addiction that are explored. Oddly enough, the addiction is shown in a few different ways. From his pursuit of his experiments, to the drugs and money he prizes.  That is no depth to this, it's  a gory version of a serial killer story, with no hints at all to the moral dilemmas that made the original what it is.

And I'm going to end this here.

283 Days till Hallowe'en

Night Bleeds November

The Oxford Canadian Dictionary 's definition of vampire : a ghost or reanimated corpse supposed to leave its grave at night to suck the blood of the living,
their definition of a zombie: a corpse said to be revived by witchcraft, a dull or exceedingly tired person,
the definition of a revenant : a visible ghost or animated corpse believed to return from the grave to terrorize the living, a zombie.
 
movie: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994)  starring Kenneth Branagh and Robert De Niro.
plot: When an explorer finds his ship trapped in ice at the northest point of the then known world, he is startled to discover a man half frozen. When he takes him aboard, he learns the man's history.  Victor Frankenstein having lost his mother in childbirth when she had his younger brother, becomes obsessed with the idea of cheating death at all costs. He begins studying the works of both modern medicine and the known occult philosophies. He hides himself away in his lab, at first reanimating dead tissue in small animals, but eventually moving on to the idea of reanimating the recently dead. (this comes after yet another lost love one) His single minded obsession leads way to him becoming sick, and taken away from the university by his best friend and his step-sister; Elizabeth. Unknown to them, Victor had been successful in creating a new lifeform, which he's run in fear from. We then see the world through the eyes of the creature, as he learns to survive on his own while having to hide his injuries. Before long, the creature demands that Victor create a mate for him, and swears that he will not rest until either he is allowed to have what Victor has or takes it all away from Victor in rage. When Victor tries to outsmart the creature by secretly marrying Elizabeth, the creature retaliates by killing Elizabeth. He then demands that Elizabeth be used to create his own mate. Succeeding in this against his will, Victor claims the newly reanimated Elizabeth for his own, but she understands what has happened to her and kills herself. The two men are then left running from each other in a battle of wills.

I have to say, one of my favourite scenes has always been the creature's revenge when he rips the heart out of Elizabeth.  Another is when Clerval introduces himself in the street after the lecture, complimenting the coat and Victor says "I am not mad". There is just something so perfect in the comedic timing between the two.  Is it wrong to admit that Clerval is one of my favourite characters in the movie version?  He's the perfect combination of silly sidekick and serious conscience. ("Dear diary why does no one understand me? P.S. I am not mad!") 
You also have the stairs scene, where Victor is carrying the dead Elizabeth up this winding staricase in this blood red robe (a toss to the fact they used the same set from Dracula) It puts you in mind of some demonic-angel ascending from hell.  This is his big F-U to everyone, throwing all logic and ethics out the window by brazenly admitting to what he's been doing. No longer even trying to hid the fact he's been messing around with stuff he maybe shouldn't have.

Besides wanting the trenchcoat he wears in the beginning (and later worn by the creature) I always wanted the journal Victor keeps. There is something about the idea of a book of all knowlegdgefullness...

Here is a man who is caught between the knowledge he's gathered of the occult and the modern Christian concepts of God. His desperation leads to first his faith in extending life, then to his obsession of "gathering the raw materials" to prove it can be done. He bucks the limits of the then modern medicine when he knowingly says that to grant pain free/death free life was a risk worth any consequence.

It's interesting that they set the movie during the time of a plague, given that vampires were often "blamed" for many of the plagues that happened.  The use of birthing fluid and electricity is brilliantly used here to help "kickstart" the reanimation. Electricity, although connected to the Frankenstein movies, was never really touched upon in the book. (there is one scene in the book where Victor is transfixed by a thunder storm and a dead tree)
We see how Victor's single minded obsession also leads to his illness and depression. He's fallen to his own madness and half wasted away. (visually putting you in mind of a vampire) 

Right off, I'm having issues with the photo and I have no clue how to flip it in the post here so yeah it's sideways...

Book: After the death of his mother, Victor Frankenstein, goes off to university where he quickly becomes obsessed with the idea of the "natural sciences". After devoting nearly four years of his life to the study of what some would consider metaphysics, he begins to question the reality of heaven, hell, lifeforce and creation. Consumed with the idea of a stronger man created not from the natural connection of sexual relationships, but from the idea of expanding on the evolution of what is already, he begins to reanimate life into dead tissue. When faced with his creation, the truth of what he has done, of what human nature is capable of, he flees in fear. When his best friend Clerval arrives at the university, he finds Victor near death from illness and exhaustion. The evidence of Victor's addictions long since disappeared. When they decide to take a trip back home, to visit the family, they learn that Victor's youngest brother has been murdered, and their adopted sister Justine is accused of the crime, Victor knows without a doubt that his creature has done this for revenge. Meeting with the creature on a remote mountain top, the creature asks one thing of Victor, to end his suffering and create a female for him. When Victor refuses, the creature begins to kill off each of the family members till there is no one left to protect.

It's been a few years since I last read this, and I have to admit I had completely forgotten about the side story midway regarding the "French family and the Arabian wife", that the creature tells.  It shows a lot about the types of stories that were popular at the time of the author's writing (such as 1001 Nights,  where the anthology style was becoming popular. Where you would have one storyteller giving you different tales)

Frankenstein is a story of obsession, vice, fear, faith, disillusion, and ego.  While the character of Frankenstein sets out to explore the inner world of humankind, the character of the creature sets out by no fault of his own to discover the outer world. Each as lost and disgusted by what they find. 

I always saw the relationship between the two leads as that of a sire bond. There is actually a scene in the book where Victor refers to the creature as his own vampire, when he realizes that the creature is trying to destroy everything he loves. The story refers to them as Father-Son, God-Adam, God-Satan,  style relationships. But, in it's own way, it's as if we are looking at a split personality, one of innocence gone wrong. Each is left struggling with their need for family and a place to fit, neither finding it. That is, until it's too late. It isn't till faced with their own deaths, that each seems to realize how much they are devoted to the other.

The level of manipulation going on between the two, is much like that of Dracula and Renfield, or even Dracula and Harker. The creature puts the worst fears into Victor, knowing his threats are the only thing holding any sway over him. The only difference here is that the creature doesn't do what he does out of ego, he does it out of grief.  There are moments in the story, where Victor has lost all reason, all hope. He's emotionally and physically weak, drained having put all his time, effort, energy into either making the creature or running from his fear of the creature. This is one of the biggest examples of the classic folklore vampiric relationship. The totally absorption of self into the ego of another. (there is also the nod to the fact the creature mostly only moves around by night)

Besides the fact the story deals with having a god-complex, the metaphors for loneliness and self-destruction are two of the most common we see in vampire stories. The two main characters, Victor and his creature, are both dealing with an extreme level of isolation. Neither being able to accept fully that they invited it themselves. Victor by his obsession to recreate life and the creature by his obsession to fit in.


Okay, so I'm going to shut up now and point you to Heather's blog All Roads Lead to the Kitchen, so you can see what she has to offer on the topic.

Next month, we're rounding out the year with Dracula both the book and the 1992 movie version Bram Stoker's Dracula. But I'll be back later in the week with the official post on that.

Hallowe'en Week p5 (night bleeds)

So this is day 5 of the blog's Hallowe'en week, and it happens to be the monthly vampire book/movie club day.  And I have a confession to make...I did not finish reading the book. I know, I'm the host to book club, but I failed to do my own homework before hand, and did not realize the book is 700 pages long. When I added it to the list, I thought it was one of Stephen King's shorter novellas.  So I ran out of time, and never finished the book half of the combo this month.

I did however, get around to Fright Night, and decided to give you a "what that movie inspired me to do" dish to soften the blow of no book half... The combo was suppose to be that of the neighbourhood being taken over by a vampire and no one believing the one person who knew.

What I am going to do, since I never officially listed anything for next month's combo, I'm going to extend this month's into next, and offer the choice of doing the originally planned combo of the book Frankenstein, and the 1994 movie version Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.( starring Kenneth Branagh and Robert De Niro)  So if you want to join in next month's Night Bleeds, it's a choice of Fright Night/Salem's Lot  or Frankenstein.   And since I've only got myself to blame for not finishing my homework...I'll be covering both.

Fright Night (1985):  Charlie Brewster is obsessed with vampires. When he spots the new neighbours moving a coffin in next door, he becomes obsessed with proving there is a vampire living there. When he goes to the police, telling them about the murdered prostitutes last being seen at the neighbour's, no one believes him. Turning to his local hero, a late night horror host Peter Vincent, Charlie finds himself in a battle for not just his own soul, but that of those closest to him.

The key elements in this movie are belief, respect, loyalty, courage, desperation and obsession.  This is probably the best bridge between the way horror movies had been and the direction they turned in the late 80's going forward. The vampire movies started to turn from the point of view of the hunters to that of the vampires, not too mention, the vampires went from being the village terrors to becoming slick, sexy, desirable ideals. The scenes with the character of Peter Vincent, do play out more like the classic vampire movies, with him having to prove that the vampire is indeed a supernatural creature. As well, as fighting off the Renfield character of Evil Ed. The apartment Peter Vincent (classic combo name of Vincent Price and Peter Cushing) is decorated to remind you of the old Hammer style films, as there were always garlic and crosses prominent throughout the "old inns, churches, castles".  The big theme in those old style films, was always having to save the soul of the virginal girls, which in itself was a metaphor for losing your virginity and becoming "an adult". We see this played out in the character of Amy. When the movie opens, we see her ready to give herself to Charlie, who's distracted by his "childish obsession" with vampires as he sees the neighbours move in with a coffin. Amy, later in the infamously cool dance club scene, is in turn seduced by the older man, and turned into a vampire. The dance scene in itself is very erotic and more than suggestive to the idea that she has "lost her virginity" to him. When we next see her, she's dressed similar to the "brides" in most classic vampire movies, and it's once again Peter Vincent who raises a cross shying her away.
There's a great line midway in the film, where the vampire Jerry Dandrige tells Peter Vincent that in order for the cross to work on him, Vincent needs to have faith in it. Lending to the idea, that because of him being an actor, he's lost all faith in anything other than the material. This line is repeated later on near the end, when Vincent does in fact hold Jerry Dandrige back for a few moments with the cross. I have to point out, that both Evil Ed and Amy are easily affected by the simple sight of the cross, implying one of two things; either because they are fledglings and therefore weaker, the cross has a lot of power over them; or their own faith and belief in the image of the cross is what causes them to buckle. Suggesting highly that the power of suggestion is greater than the sword. (you can also argue on a third idea, that because Dandrige is such an old creature, the Christian god has no power over him as he predates Christianity/has other religious beliefs)
The opening scene, also shows us a thin line between obsession and desires or even that of basic needs. As Charlie is easily distracted by what's going on outside of his window, ignoring his girlfriend. Sex becomes less a need for him as he lets himself become engulfed with his obsessions. We also have a vampire movie playing in the background of the opening scene, with "Mr. Peter Vincent the Great Vampire Hunter" who is shown holding his stake backwards as he begins to kill a vamp. This again gives to the idea of not paying attention to your surroundings, and not paying attention to the situation at hand. It goes on to lend to the idea that your personal heroes are fallible. In the end of it all, the cowardly "movie hero" Peter Vincent, turns out to be the real hero of the plot, as he's the one who kills the vampires. He does this because he's left with no choice not because he's brave and strong. His desperation is foreshadowed when he takes the kid's money to help Charlie to begin with because he's beyond broke. And again this shows you how he's lost faith in anything that isn't of the material world.

I have a recipe...there is a bit more food than you would have first thought, mostly in the first half of the film. From casseroles, to burgers, chips, sloppy joes, fruit, beer, fries, pop, and a few drinks at the dance club.   Because we see the character of Jerry Dandrige eating apples more than a few times, I thought I'd make an Apple Brown Betty.

Slice up 3 to 6 large apples, placing them on the bottom of a pie dish, if you'd like you can add a light sprinkle of lemon juice to them to keep them from turning brown while you proceed,

Sprinkle both  2 teaspoons white sugar and cinnamon on them. You may add a pinch of nutmeg if you wish.

mix together 4 tablespoons butter, 2/3 cup of brown sugar and 8 tablespoons flour into a crumbled mixture, spreading over the top.
Bake roughly 45 minutes at 350degrees depending on your oven.

I know, so simple it hurts right?

I know my essay sort of blows this time around too. I've got bit more I want to say on Fright Night, which I will try to cover when I do the second part of this next month. I just didn't realize the book Salem's Lot was as long as it is, and just didn't allow myself enough time to get through it.

As I said, I'll extend this month's book club/movie combo to the end of November, and let anyone who wants to join in have a choice between it and Frankenstein. More on that later in the week with the official post.

Don't forget to check out Heather's offerings over on All Roads Lead to the Kitchen, this month, (here) she actually did the homework.

year 5 day 177 Hallowe'en Week p3

movie: Blade 2 Bloodhunt
starring: Wesley Snipes, Norman Reedus
genre: Action, Horror
year: 2002
format: DVD

plot: Blade has been hunting the vampires who kidnapped and turned his best friend and mentor, Whistler with the help of a new weapons expert named Scud. It takes them two years to find him, saving him just as a new threat appears on the scene. The pureblood vampires search the group out, needing their help to stop an new breed of vampire. One that not only feeds on their own, but turns them into Reapers. Reapers have a higher metabolism from normal vampires, and are unable to control their bloodlust, therefore having to feed every single day. When the group learn who's actually behind it all, a new level of trust sees the light of day.

Well, it's a sequel, so you know what that means...bigger bad guys, more explosions, and three times the blood.
This sort of became a trend in the last decade, the idea of vampires playing mad scientist or having a natural mutation. (Underworld, Daybreakers, Reign of Darkness, Red Blooded American Girl) And the whole thing of enemies working together against a bigger enemy.

This is pretty much a big shoot'em up film, with some witty banter between Snipes and Ron Pearlman, who plays the "leader" of the vampire soldiers called the Blood Pack. Most of the "rules" laid out in the first film regarding the houses is bypassed, in favour of just running around in the sewers shooting everything that moves. The timeframe this was shot leads you to see just where the goth subculture was really becoming used by mainstream television/movies as an blendable tool. From the costume design to the lighting, which in this case had a lot of earthy tones; compared to the first film which catered to stark neutrals (black, white, silver)  I get caught up in the look of this movie apposed to the plot every time I watch it.

I do like the idea that the vampires have to admit in this, they aren't the all infallible creatures they are hyped to be in the original. There is just something about stories where the scary creatures are scared of something.

what did I learn: Dude, how can you not love a guy who calls himself Scud?

year 5 Day 174 Night Bleeds Aug

This month's all vampire book and movie club combo was Let the Right One In. The original 2004 book and the 2008/09 movie version and/or the remake Let Me In.  I did both movie versions, cause I like to get in over my head. (I must become the vampire queen of all bloggingness. Yeah I'm having one of those days. Laugh and carry on)
Yep, I know, I'm super late in the day with mine.  But that's okay, cause you know vampires are late day people. hahaha.   So, before I get into it, my regular readers know I do my best to keep spoilers to a minimum, but there's no way around it today.  So onward...*SPOILER ALERT*

movie: Let the Right One In
starring: Kare Hedebrant, Lina Leandersson
genre: Thriller
year: 2008
format: DVD

plot: As young Oskar is bullied at school, he begins to connect with the strange new neighbour Eli, who has just moved in next door. She helps him to learn to fight back and gives him hope that things will improve. All set to a back drop where the neighbourhood is no longer safe, as a serial killer is on the loose. What Oskar is yet to learn, is that his new girlfriend is a vampire. 

This is based on the 2004 book of the same name. 

So the movie drops a ton of elements that are in the book. Half the book's plot and characters are missing. Which I'll get to in a moment. 

This version of the story focuses on the bullying that is going on, and the innocent sexual awakening between the "young couple".   The bullying has left Oskar self aware, but with little self esteem. We see him pouring over clippings about serial killers, and murders in the area. Partly as a foreshadow of his future, partly because we're suppose to get the idea that he's not completely "normal".  He's filled with revenge fantasies, that he's not sure he'd ever be able to uphold. 
While Oskar is playing out one of these revenge ideals, Eli sneaks up and silently watches. She sees in him a potential that he is unsure he has himself.  This is all inter cut with scenes of an unknown man trying and failing at killing someone not far from the neighbourhood.  Which we quickly find out is the "guardian" of Eli.
Eli is left alone after her guardian is caught and tries to cover it up by attempting to kill himself. This also goes wrong, and Eli is forced to feed off him. This in turn is the point, where the vampire theme really kicks in. As Eli then begins hunting nightly, no longer able to drink "bottled blood" that her guardian had been getting for her.
One of her victims survives, and while in hospital, is exposed. Literally. As she allows the daylight to kill her, setting her husband off on a rampage to "kill the thing that did this."  He then tracks Eli to the apartment building and attempts to kill her, but Oskar stops him long enough for Eli to feed.
Oskar has one more run in with the bullies at the school swim lesson, and is nearly drowned, causing Eli to save him. Killing the bullies.

Alright now, in this version, we never learn how Eli became a vampire. What we do learn is Eli is not a girl. Technically speaking. She's a transgendered person.  This is one of those subplots from the novel that got wiped under the sofa in this version of the story.  This is hinted at through out, as she keeps saying to Oskar "What if I'm not a girl? Would you still like me?"  the audience to this point, just thinks she's going on about not being human. 
The relationship that the two enter into, is that of a "first crush" type of situation. As it's a friendship with little to no physical contact, but you can tell from Oskar's behaviour; that he's sexually attracted to her. There is one scene later on where they kiss, and we see Eli as a middle aged woman for a brief few seconds. 
This relationship on the surface, appears to be that of equals. Eli is relating to Oskar as a child would. But, before long, it spirals down into a more Dracula/Renfield situation. As Oskar replaces Hakan; Eli's previous guardian. 

This version of the story, is about self esteem, being true to you and not being afraid to love. It's also, as I stated earlier, about that innocence of first love.

what did I learn?  Strength and love are not always separate entities.   

The Book:  In a small suburb, a neighbourhood is in chaos. Oskar, who is left alone too much, bullied constantly, has begun acting out. He's obsessed with murders, steals, sneaks out, disrespects his mother, and hangs out with the older kids. A few doors down, Tommy, one of the older kids he sometimes hangs out with, is a thief and stoner, who's mom is about to marry an extremely religious police officer; Staffan. Staffan is currently on a manhunt for a ritual killer, who has been draining people of their blood only blocks away from the neighbourhood. The same time the killings started, Eli and her dad Hakan, moved in next door to Oskar.  
Eli and Oskar, develop a relationship; over a few weeks time frame. During which, Hakan becomes jealous, acting out on his own by hiring teenaged male prostitutes.  After Hakan attempts but fails to kill a young male, and is captured, he disfigures himself. This leaves Eli alone and vulnerable. She's forced to hunt, for the first time in years, exposing herself as a vampire. Visiting him in the hospital, she feeds off of him, before allowing Hakan to throw himself from the hospital window. But doesn't die. The killings continue to worsen, leading the police to question everything. 
Meanwhile, Oskar is dealing with everyday situations, which include the school bullies, who are making his life a holy terror daily. Eli, in an effort to help him, tells him about her past. We learn that in fact, that when she was human, she was not a girl but a boy. Eli had been sexually mutilated before becoming a vampire. 
The two find they have no choice, but to runaway together, but first, they have to tie up loose ends.

Okay, so there are - and I never actually counted- about 20 characters in the cast of this novel. The original movie version only deals with about 6.  We're brought into the lives of the entire neighbourhood. The kids, the police, the victims and their friends.  One of the big subplots that is left out of the original movie, is that the character of Hakan, is a pedophile. This is why Eli picks him to begin with. She's able to control him, by manipulating him with the "promise of being together" that she never follows through on. This leads to an attempted rape scene much later in the novel, where Tommy the stoner character, ends up becoming a bit of a hero. 

Though in the novel, we are given some of Eli's history, we're never told just how she becomes a vampire. We learn she was a boy while human who was mutilated by someone. But we're never told if the one who did so was a vampire as well, or just a psychopath? You are left to draw your own conclusions on this. But, as I've talked about before in other months, folklore states that a violent death be it by murder or suicide; one becomes a vampire. So, we could be led to believe that Eli became a vampire because of the way she died. She's also got the ability to shapeshift. Being able to change her form to resemble a bat-human hybrid. Eli is also a bit careless. I got the impression this was suppose to help bring the idea that she was a kid when turned. 

The "good guys" in this are really up to interpretation. The outer appearance of some of the characters, such as the police officer who it turns out is extremely prejudiced, is almost too saccharine. And the theme of things not being what they appear is a main one in the novel.  Another element that is left out of the original movie version, is Oskar's acting out. He steals, he has no regard for his broken family, and lies. He's more human, more understandable in the novel than in the movie version. The movie I felt, made him too much of a victim in an attempt to make him overly likable as the hero. The novel all around is grittier. 

I didn't care for the characters of the older group. Most of who are middle aged alcoholics and become the vampires victims. The cowardly Gosta who is the witness to the crimes, and the obsessed crazy cat guy, just felt flat. But at the same time, he's the perfect vehicle to express the loneliness and isolation everyone is feeling. Which, given this is set 30 plus years ago, adds to the heaviness of the situation.  There is a lot of talk about not having the right environment to grow up in playing on the fear of not being like everyone else. Being the "other".  Most of the families are single parents, even the middle aged characters are either single parents themselves, or dealing with the death of their only parent. The idea of being orphaned runs heavy through this. Given this is set in 1981, it really plays well with the idea of things not "getting out there"; the way it would now a days. Everything is contained within the small neighbourhood.  One of the best metaphors running in this, is the paranoia of the outsider theme. As it uses a subplot of the people's fear of the fact the Russians were seen just off their coastline. It's referred to whenever the characters find themselves too worked up over the killings, and need to talk about "in other news".

There is so much going on in this novel, from the characters being afraid to admit they just want relationships, to the idea of running away to better their situations, to being afraid of themselves. While reading this, I actually kept thinking of the 1983 slasher film Sleepaway Camp. 
Two things about the book I really have to mention, one - the bathtub. In the book, Eli is sleeping in a tub filled with blood. This gets changed in both films, to her just covered up in a sleeping bag in the tub. Removing all connections it had to Elizabeth Bathroy.  and two- the cats. The whole subplot of animals, specially cats, being able to tell when a supernatural creature was around, was brilliant. It does make it to the original movie, but not to the remake.

Remake : Let Me In
starring Chloe Grace Moretz, Kodi Smit-Mcphee
genre:Thriller, Horror
year:2010
format: DVD

Plot:After arresting a serial killer, who's disfigured himself, a detective finds himself on the trail of the man's identity, which leads him to uncover the real killer who is a vampire.

Right off, this is set in 1983, a two year difference from the original story.  There is this great subtly shown with our lead character of Owen, standing first in his room looking from one set of windows to the other; as if at a crossroads. One direction points out to the normal life, as a couple are about to have sex, the other direction leads to the supernatural, as he sees Abby for the first time.  This is quickly followed by the lead character standing outside at a literal crossroads in the street, looking first up at Abby's darkened apartment window, then at the couple as they walk up the parking lot on the opposite side.  I honestly thought this was a brilliant way to show him exploring; as all 12 years olds seem to do, the balance between life and death. The fascination with the power we have over life and death.

This then, becomes pretty much scene for scene to the original film. But, I found it to be a darker texture, with more emphasis on the crime angle, as well as just the human nature of it. The little differences of removing some of the characters/combined a few, gave it more depth. I also thought the acting was better. Where the original version focused more on the innocence of the two leads, this lends to them being more rounded.
We also don't get let in - no pun intended- on the fact she's transgender/non-gender. There is a scene where Owen asks Abby to be his girl, and she tells him she's not a girl, she's nothing. That is the only hint we have towards the big plotline in the original novel. 

It's rare for me to say this, but I liked the remake a lot more. I think having two powerhouse actors of Richard Jenkins and Elias Koteas, added a lot to the weight of the characters. This version also reminded a lot of the remake of Fright Night from 2011. 
I found they made the Jenkins character - Hakan in the original story- smarter in the remake. He still gets caught, but he's able to get out of the situations somewhat better than the other version. 

Okay folks, I'm know there is a ton more in the metaphors and details that I'm failing to express, but I have to cut this here.  Don't forget to check out Heather's take on this month's combo.  Next month, there is half a combo. Don't laugh, the vampire movie will be Dark Crystal, and the book will be your choice.  But I'll be back later in the week with the official announcement on that and the round up. I know I know, I haven't done a proper round up for these in a long while. 
 

year 5 day 145

movie: The Fly
starring: Jeff Goldblum, Geena Davis
genre; Sci-Fi, Horror,
year; 1986
format: Hollywood Suites Channel

plot: After testing an experiment out on himself goes wrong, a scientist begins to de- evolve.

Based on the 1958 movie and the 1957 short story.

Take about a mad scientist. I haven't seen this in years, so much I'd forgotten just how gross it got. For some reason though, I seem to remember there having been an explanation for his extreme sugar consumption, which there didn't actually seem to be. (trailer maybe?)

I found the first half to have been rushed, which was the style for the decade it was done. I got the impression of the main character having an addiction to his own creation. That high you get when you've managed to create something so off the charts new. He kept coming back to the idea that he was - in the first half of the film- creating a stronger faster form of evolution. At which point, while the adrenaline is still controlling him, he starts desiring a mate just as unique as himself. The character is no longer functioning on any form of human level; pardon the pun. He's become tunnel-vision goal minded, that of survival. And in this case -for the first half of the film- survival of his new species. The second half, just seems to be about survival at any costs. He's nearly accepted the fact he's about to die, than seems to begin fighting that. That fear of death becoming more than he can handle.

Metaphors I got from this were addiction, disease, transformation, paranoia and mental illness. There's also a lot of jealousy floating around between the three main characters. Both the Goldblum character and the John Getz try to out "alpha male" each other during moments throughout the film.

what did I learn? You know I'm going to say it...IT'S A FRANKENSTEIN MOVIE

year 5 day 132

movie: Resident Evil
starring: Milla Jovovich, Eric Mabius
genre; Sci-fi, Horror,
year: 2002
format: TV Edit

plot: A woman wakes up without her memory, and is taken to an underground lab, where a virus has managed to turn everyone into zombies.

Based on the video games.

Holy Omega Man Syndrome Batman! I really see how 90% of the zombie genre has developed from the vampire genre. Yeah, I'm never letting that factor go.

So you've got a big bad corporation that is slicing up dna between humans and animals and playing around with dead things. You just know that's got trouble written all over it.  I'm guessing the big theme behind it and the original game is got something to do with not trusting big corps?
TV edit, so the gore was minimal which was fine for me. (I must be too old can't stomach stuff like I used to) There was a lot of shoot 'em up-ing and not much in the way of an actual plot. Which, may or may not be the fault of the tv edit.
You do have some basic spy on spy sabotage going on with the lead character and her husband. You know from the beginning that one of them is the big bad who unleashed everything, but it doesn't play as smooth as it could have. (again might have been the tv edit)

I'd like to know what the monster at the end of the hallway was suppose to be? We see it escape, feed and then become something worse. Was it a dog? Was it a human once? Was it a giant tasmanian devil? It just sort of is there and then dies in a blaze of unnatural greeny flames.

what did I learn? Everyone wants to play Doctor Frankenstein.

year 5 day 66

movie: Pride Prejudice and Zombies
starring: Jack Huston, Lily James
genre: Comedy, Drama, Action
year: 2016
format: Cinema

plot: The Bennet women are some of the most fearful and skilled slayers of their generation, trained to fight the zombie outbreak that has engulfed England. Now, if they could only find a way to win themselves husbands who are still alive, their lives would have meaning.

Based on the book Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, which is based on the original novel Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen.

I've been looking forward to this movie for the last few years, since I heard it was going to be turned into a movie. And you know what...I was bit disappointed.  This deviates from both the original source and from the modern monster version.  I seem to remember Lydia and Wickham ending up together in the PPZ book version, and Wickham in a state of needing a nurse. As well as the character of Charlotte becoming a zombie and Elizabeth helping her hide it from everyone. In the movie, none of that seems to happen. The character of Charlotte the best friend, who in the PPZ  book had a much more important role, has I think it was two scenes in the movie. Sort of disappointed to see that. As well as the character of Lydia, who becomes a victim in the movie, not the scheming backstabbing gold digger she is in the books. One of my favourite scenes from the book version had the heroes using cauliflower as fake brains to bait the zombies, but the movie seemed to bypass that idea.

In the original Austen story, as in all her novels, even though they are all set during the war, but we are never given details of any war; that is the one thing the movie of PPZ does. It sets, in it's own way, the missing "war" into the Austen stories.

The comedy didn't come across as well in the movie as it did in the Seth Grahame-Smith book. This was pretty much a straight up action flick that just happened to take place during the 1800's.

what did I learn? If you liked the show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, then this is for you.

Theme Week p3-Frankenstein

Victor Frankenstein

plot: The young doctor saves the life of a circus hunchback, after witnessing the hunchback's quick thinking in saving the trapeze performer from a fatal fall. Taking him home, Victor straightens his back for him, giving him the name of his former roommate, Igor. Igor then becomes not only Frankenstein's assistant, but his best friend, as they begin work on the first round of animal trials before finally attempting Frankenstein's first creature.

This is the 2015 drama horror starring James McAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe.  Based on the classic novel by Mary Shelley.

Yes, I got to the cinema today. Always a happy-happy-joy-joy when I can manage to make it there. And ironically, the release of this movie is NOT why I picked the theme week this month to be Frankenstein, just a happy coincidence, then again, I don't believe in coincidence. Seriously, I had done vampires and werewolves earlier in the year, and had thought Frankenstein would be nice for later in the season, and...nobody really cares about that so...

I liked this version. SPOILER ALERT - if you're going to see this with the intent of seeing a typical telling of the Frankenstein story, you'll be disappointed. This is told from the point of view of the character Igor, and has more to do with his journey then it actually does with Frankenstein's.  
We see Igor's love interest, his share of the experiments, his battle of morality not Victor's. The creature itself is on screen for only the last 5 minutes of air time. 

Both characters start off being hunted by a detective who comes across in a very Sherlock Holmes sort of way, which is ironic in itself given the actor -Andrew Scott- played lead villain Moriarty, in the BBC version of Sherlock.  

Then ending leaves the story semi-open to tell further adventures of the classic characters, which I for one really liked.

After seeing McAvoy playing the lead character of Frankenstein, I don't think I'll ever be able to think of another actor in the role. He plays it with such an air of psychotic glee that he sends chills up your spine with a certain wide eyed grin. You almost have to wonder what dirty thoughts were going through his mind for those close ups?

That's about all I can say without giving away too much of the movie.

13 days of Hallowe'en Day 11

Goosebumps

plot: After moving to a new town, Zach believes his neighbour is being held against her will by her dad. Breaking into the neighbour's house, Zach and his new buddy Champ, discover that their neighbour is none other then author R.L.Stine. Curious as to why he has all the original manuscripts to his famous books under lock and key, the two boys decide to open one. To their horror it unleashes one of the monsters from the story. Too bad for them, it wasn't the only one, as a ventriloquist's dummy, Slappy, has been awakened as well. Slappy steals all the remaining books and begins to free the monsters, wrecking havoc on the town.

This is the 2015 comedy horror starring Jack Black and Dylan Minnette

So, yay me, got to the cinema.

Try to do this without spoilers as it is still in cinemas.   Even though Jack Black has three roles : Stine, Slappy and the voice of the  Invisible Boy; there wasn't enough of him on screen for my tastes.  Yes, I get this was targeted to kids, and therefore the teenagers were the "stars" of the piece, but Black stole the scenes he was in.

There wasn't a whole lot different then anything you've seen on the tv show, it kept it's pace and managed to keep the large assortment of monsters in check. There were by my count, seven featured bad guys in this with the "rest" being crowd filler. Which, given the source material, was a feet in itself. This could have branched off into a ton of different story lines, but managed to keep it tight enough to be easy to follow.
I loved the little nods to The Shining, and the typewriter. I actually felt there were a few threads that kick back to the bases of The Shining and Stephen King's Dark Half and Secret Window.

Did I mention I hate ventriloquist dummies?  I think that was the perfect selection for the big bad in this. 

What would I like to see in the sequel...more Jack Black.