Tag: Art

Black roses (1988)

When a movie informs you that it’s a Shapiro-Glickenhaus production, you’re in for a ride. And Black Roses did not disappoint.

I’ve always been intrigued by the psychological/political dimensions of the 80s. Poltergeist kind of touches on this in the most subtle way, how family dynamics were altered during this decade. Black Roses picked up on this concept and ran with it.

The film shines a spotlight on the contradictions within Reagan-era politics: parents being appalled yet titillated by youth culture (and a complete lack of awareness that these tensions exist). The story of Black Roses centers on some “heavy metal” band coming to small town USA and corrupting its youth. The youth become demon-possessed and start killing their parents. Only a mustached English teacher stands in their way.

Of course, the band is entirely blamed for the “corruption”. Despite the shitty parenting throughout, the adults never once ask themselves: “are we to blame?”. But I guess parenting styles in the 1980s didn’t include things like paying attention to your children. Additionally, because parents were unable to take responsibility for themselves, we now have “culture wars”…which stem back to this decade…on which adults can use as a scapegoat for why they have shitty children.

Now I’m probably giving the filmmakers WAY to much credit for this analysis. They probably just wanted to show rock n’ roll and boobs with a few demons thrown in for good measure. But all good art is a reflection on the time it was produced. And Black Roses certainly pulls back the curtain on Reagan’s America.

Rip Michael Krueger

If I’ve said it once, I’ll say it a thousand times: I am to Tubi what raccoons are to trash. So if Tubi puts something up there to watch, by God I’m watching it and leaving a godawful mess while I’m at it.

Why though? Why would one put themselves through pointless agony?

I’ll tell you why: Mindkiller and Night Vision.

Before you read this, you probably never heard of either of those films. But now you have. So I’m providing a FREE public service: finding overlooked gems before they are totally and completely forgotten. I’m a historian, this is what I do.

Both films were directed by Michael Krueger and both…according to IMDb…were released in 1987. Unfortunately, Krueger died in 1990, presumably leaving both films to lie in obscurity until their resurrection into the public consciousness by Tubi.

You might think I’m being facetious over my praise of Krueger’s work, but I assure you, I genuinely enjoyed both movies. Sure, they might look like cheap after-school specials…the sound editing is particularly atrocious in Mindkiller…but a few technical issues aside, aspiring filmmakers should take note: where you lack a budget, you can make up for with heart.

As you all know, I have a horrible memory. So I don’t recall too many plot details. But Mindkiller, roughly, is about a dork librarian who reads some outlandish shit and he begins to control minds. I think. He then begins to control the mind of his love interest, played convincingly by Shirley Ross as a strait laced librarian.

Ross then flips the script for Night Vision, also as the love interest, as she plays a street wise video clerk showing her boyfriend the ropes. The streets of Denver have never looked so mean. Remember, this was the 80s, before all the hipsters moved in and gentrified the place. But supposedly Night Vision is also a horror film. I think a VCR is demon possessed or something. While I don’t remember being scared, I do remember being taken in by the film’s earnestness and Ross’ performance.

It’s a shame that Krueger didn’t have a longer career. But I am thankful for what we did get.

RIP

Luther the geek

Boy times have changed.

Back in the 80s, people thought that sexual assault and tormenting families was hilarious. But that was life in Reagan’s America. It was a disgusting time and I’m glad it’s over.

A nice little relic from this era is Luther the Geek. The best part about it is it’s short run time: 80 minutes 👍

The plot is simple: some lunatic is inexplicably granted parole and he instantly begins a reign of terror. He grabs ahold of some poor woman and proceeds to terrorize her and her daughter, who is somehow older than than her mother. The movie doesn’t know if it takes place in Iowa or Illinois, but really, who cares? They’re basically the same state.

The film epically concludes with the hero and villain clucking at each other like chickens.

The gore? It’s pretty good.

I wouldn’t say I’d “recommend” it. But hell, it’s only 80 minutes of your life.

Otto focus

I make no secret of my love for Paul Schrader. As far as being a screenwriter, he’s the GOAT.

Unfortunately he didn’t write Auto Focus, he only directed. Still though, it’s familiar territory for him: sexual obsession, loneliness, religious struggle, etc etc.

Watching Willem Dafoe and Greg Kinnear beat off together while they watch their own sex tapes is cinematic gold. My only complaint about this movie is that it should have been LONGER.

Honestly, this hit a little too close to home. If you’ve never been in a friendship like the one between Bob Crane and John Carpenter you might not understand. But these kinds of relationships exist among two (mostly heterosexual) men who are cocksmiths.

In sum, this film exposes the dark side of “bromance”.

fckn fans man

My go-to site for nerdish bickering is Trekmovie.com. One of the writers for Star Trek 09 and Star Trek Into Darkness, Roberto Orci, infamously jumped onto fans there a few years ago. For internet anthropologist/historians like me, it’s a goldmine.

Trekkies just aren’t used to having nice things. And Strange New Worlds is a nice thing. Sure it’s not perfect, but overall it’s pretty good Star Trek.

But the latest episode involved a species called “the Gorn” who were first introduced in TOS way back in the sixties. If you’re not a Trek fan, you probably know who they are because a member of that species was involved in one of the most parodied scenes in all of science fiction:

Remember this shit?

In SNW, the Gorn were updated to look more terrifying and were introduced to Starfleet earlier than what canon allowed (SNW takes place before the adventures of Captain Kirk). This predictably caused a shitstorm with the fans.

Look, I can roll with the best of Star Trek nerds. But to most sane people, this is a big nothing-burger.

This is also why the James Bond series is the most underrated of all the long-running franchises. The producers simply don’t give two shits about canon. Each film can theoretically take place in its own timeline. They just don’t get bogged down in the details because their purpose is to entertain.

Arguably, Star Trek serves a different purpose. Still though, fans are missing the forest for the trees. The larger question should be: was it a GOOD episode?

Personally I thought they killed off Hemmer, a very solid character, too soon. But his death did provide a good character arc for Uhura (and laid the foundation for Spock’s most infamous decision in Star Trek II). Obviously they were going for an Alien feel in this episode (which is okay, science fiction series often steal from one another) but overall it was pretty good.

Some fans are angry because the writers aren’t inventing new species to explore. But this “alien of the week” method that Trek fans have become accustomed to makes the series feel paper thin. I like it when writers take the time to explore an existing world. It adds depth.

But this latest Star Trek struggle session only highlights what is perhaps my biggest annoyance. Just because something is old and established, that doesn’t make it holy. The people behind TOS, to include Gene Roddenberry, were making shit up as they went. Besides, no television writer will want to pour through 9 million hours of Star Trek just to make it all add up. Hell, except for myself and Mike Stoklasa, NO ONE would want to do that. And this not only goes for Star Trek, but also for the Bible, Plato, Aristotle, Karl Marx, etc etc. They are all products of man and they can be changed by man.

As fans, we should have only one question: is it good storytelling?

happy fourth!

As we celebrate this nation’s independence while an unelected US Supreme Court does it’s damage, I’d like to discuss the British film Unmasked Part 25.

It’s been a a couple of weeks since I wrote about my journey through the dumpster that is Tubi’s horror catalog. It’s not because I haven’t been watching any films, it’s because none of them have been worth writing about.

That is until I came across Unmasked Part 25.

An important question this movie asks is: what if Jason Vorhees was just a normal guy in need of a romantic companion? And the movie follows through with that question in earnest.

As usual with these types of films, not all of the jokes land. And while it’s competently shot and lit, the sets look super cheap.

But the performances are pretty good. The actors are assisted by a solidly written screenplay and dialogue. Obviously this film was meant to be tongue in cheek, but you’ll probably be more emotionally invested than what you were expected to be.

Honestly, the script is better than it had any business being.

As for the gore, there’s a decent amount of it. Most of it is front loaded in the opening act, but those are some pretty good killings tbh.

So if your family has abandoned you for Fourth of July, you should check out this small and unusual film.

put me out of my misery

Alright, this week was much better on Tubi. I think I finished every movie I started.

There were a few good ones. Or at least a few notable ones.

Frankenhooker (1990)

It’s a shame that few actors make it in the industry. Whoever played the lead had a performance for the ages.

I hesitate to call it a “comedic” performance, although he was quite funny. But the actor perfectly encapsulated the madness and obsession that that role called for.

I can easily see the pitch for this movie:

Producer: “are there going to be boobs in the movie?”

Director: “yes but they’re all going to explode.”

Producer: “but there will be boobs?”

Now this film has quite a following. Hell, it even has a Bill Murray seal of approval, so it might not be as obscure as I’d like it to be. But it’s cult status is well earned and you should check it out.

Maniac (1980)

It’s a fairly simple concept: a maniac runs around Manhattan killing a bunch of people. But it’s pretty well executed.

And speaking of execution, it has one of the best head explosion scenes in film history (again, courtesy of the legend himself: Tom Savini…who I also think played character getting his head blown off)

The Forbidden Zone (1980)

It’s not a horror film. I don’t know what it is.

A musical?

I can handle weird. That’s not a problem. But you gotta suck audiences in. Once when they’re in, they have no choice but to sit there and watch it because they’re that engrossed. That’s not this movie.

It stars Herve Villechaize because he never turned down a paycheck, and features music from a group that eventually became Oingo Boingo.

It’s not my cup of tea, but I’m sure the theater nerds love it.

writings hard

Sorry about my halfassed posts as of late. I’m working on another project that’s taking up most of my creative energy. And that’s in addition to being employed at the toilet factory and fathering 27 kids.

But as I always say: “anything worth doing is worth losing your sanity over.”

So anyway, if anything seemed off, that’s why. Look forward to my next phoned in post. 🤷‍♂️

another round of terrible movies

It was slim pickins this week.

I probably started watching a little over a half dozen of B-movies in my quest to see every horror film on Tubi. And I probably only finished two of them.

These are those two.

The Majorettes (1986)

I love a movie that can’t decide what it wants to be. So instead of choosing, it decides to be every option.

The Majorettes calls itself a “slasher” film. Sure, okay. At times, I think, it flirts with being a supernatural comedy. Then it inexplicably becomes a remake of Rambo.

Your guess is as good as mine.

My favorite part is one villain hangs another villain using a rope that runs through a cheapass hook that’s barely screwed into the ceiling.

While the film was godawful, I am intrigued enough to check out the book that this was based on (which was adapted for the screen by its author). If it’s as random as the movie, it seems like my kind of book.

Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers (1988)

I might have to watch this one again.

It has everything that I love: private detectives, Linnea Quigley, and a short running time (boobs too, if you’re into that sort of thing).

The film is absolute trash. And deliberately so. That’s Hollywood, folks.

Honestly, the image above says everything you need to know. It ain’t Citizen Kane, but it will easily kill an hour and 15 minutes.