I watched FDR: American Badass! for the same reason that anyone else would: the title sounded funny and I had fifteen minutes to kill before I had to swap out my loads of laundry. I wasn't looking for anything particularly good to watch (and a good thing, too), but I figured that the premise would keep me entertained for a few moments. Then I realized what the premise of this movie was.
That's right, FDR: American Badass! is the amazing true story of how Franklin Roosevelt conquered the united werewolf forces of the Axis Powers, while dropping an unholy amount of polio jokes.
It all began when Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Barry Bostwick) was just the Governor of New York. While on a hunting trip with friends, they were attacked by a werewolf, who bit Frank on the leg and gave him "the polio." FDR never walked again.
Above: polio face, I assume
As time went on, FDR eventually became President of the United States. After several minutes of possibly trying to keep the US out of World War II, he decided to help the only European country that speaks English (they specify that Ireland does not count) and takes on Hitler and Mussolini (Paul Ben-Victor) by his lonesome. By the way, Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito are all werewolves.
Fact.
There's really no point discussing the acting quality in FDR: American Badass! It's really, really fucking stupid. As such, you can really only grade the actors on how funny or unfunny they are. Barry Bostwick deserves all the credit for making this movie as nearly watchable as it is. He put in a lot of effort to stretch out a very simple gag, and he wasn't afraid to act foolishly in the process.
Example: Bostwick, covered in buttermilk, humping a pitcher
Bruce McGill wasn't bad as a straight man, but this is not exactly a movie that requires a setup for its gags. There are actually a surprising number of recognizable faces in this cast. Lin Shaye, Ray Wise, William Mapother, and Paul Willson all play small parts, and all of them have their chance to say or do something crude. Keri Lynn Pratt, who I honestly don't dislike, once again played a ditzy whore quite well. Deon Richmond also played the part he is most well-known for: the black guy in a stupid comedy. The only person who really stood out was Kevin Sorbo as the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, brought on by exceedingly strong marijuana. I've never seen Sorbo flex his comedic muscles before, but he was surprisingly fun to watch as an herb-loving, super-chill Presidential ghost.
Of course he can fly
How can I try to objectively criticize the writing and directing of FDR: American Badass!? The title alone lets most people know whether they will love or hate this movie. For those of you on the fence, though, I believe that there are at least sixteen solid minutes of comedy in this film. Unfortunately, the movie is 93 minutes long. Still, director Garrett Brawith keeps a pretty solid pace and encourages the actors to ham it up to an appropriate degree. Ross Patterson's script makes no attempt to be anything other than crude and stupid, and he does it frequently enough that there are guaranteed to be a few truly funny moments.
Wheelchair of Death
In other words, if you've ever wanted to hear Franklin Roosevelt use the phrase "a bag full of dicks at a lesbian convention," then this is your film. Of course, the odds of you actively wanting to hear that particular phrase are pretty slim, so this is probably a niche audience. Not as niche as the people who want to see FDR receive sexual gratification from someone licking ketchup and mustard off his polio-stricken legs, but it's still a small audience.
Fact: this scene was recreated from an official White House photo
I guess the only question that matters is whether or not FDR: American Badass! is a good film or not. It's not. Just kidding! Not about the quality of the movie --- it's obviously trash --- but about the important question: the question should be whether or not this movie is funny. The answer, surprisingly, is "sometimes." I hate most comedies, and I loathe the current crop of pop-culture spoofs that make up most of the successful comedies nowadays. I expected to laugh at how bad FDR: American Badass! was, but I found myself actually laughing with the movie at times. It's tedious to watch all of this movie (I would recommend ten-minutes at a time), but in small doses, it can actually be kind of fun.
Like FDR at an orgy
Sure, it makes the same jokes over and over. Yes, it relies on crude humor far too often (and the novelty of old people using hip-hop slang at all). But there are some genuinely funny ideas buried under all the crap they used to pad this movie. This would have made a hysterical fake movie trailer, and a funny fifteen-minute short. But it's a feature-length film, and the jokes wear thin. FDR: American Badass! is not good, but it is better than it should be.
At the time of this post, FDR: American Badass! didn't have much information available on the internet. How little, you ask? There's not even a Wikipedia page for it! I didn't know that was even possible.
So. The infamous Halloween III: Season of the Witch, AKA "The one without Michael Myers." Yes, I was aware of what H3 was, but I decided to watch it anyway. Over the years, I've heard a lot of things about this movie, with the most optimistic being, "It's not one of the worst movies ever made. If you know the story behind it, it won't make you all that mad." Quite the endorsement. The story behind Halloween III, just in case you were not in the know, explains why it makes the jaw-dropping-in-retrospect choice to omit the main character of the series from an entire film. I've read a few different explanations for this, but it boils down to John Carpenter and Debra Hill (co-creators of the franchise) being tired of Michael, and the idea of continuing his story felt like it would be too ridiculous to take seriously, as the future sequels would prove. But the studio wanted to make more Halloweens, so Carpenter and Hill said that they would be involved in the project, but only if Halloween was transformed into an anthology title, where every film would have a different subject. It's actually a pretty amazing idea, if they had gotten the talent to back it up. Can you imagine a successful Halloween anthology franchise, where up-and-coming horror directors could go nuts and get widespread exposure? Too bad they didn't go that route, eh?
Halloween III: Season of the Witch begins exactly as you think it would: with computerized graphics and a title screen that must have taken literally seconds to produce.
Looks like the entire budget was spent wow-ing the audience with the opening credits
Dr. Dan (Tom Atkins) goes to pick up his kids for the weekend from his nagging ex-wife, and he brought them a present: Halloween masks! Because children love being told by their parent what they're going to be for Halloween. It doesn't matter, though; mom had already gotten them the cool masks, proving once again that Dr. Dan is a terrible parent. Dr. Dan represses the instinct to punch everyone in the house and instead responds to a call from work. Apparently, Dr. Dan is the only doctor that works in his hospital, because he was brought in on a case of exhaustion. Some bum passed out while clutching a Halloween mask and muttering something about people out to get him. Shockingly, the paranoid guy was right. Somebody was after him, and once they killed him, they committed suicide.
The suicidal man, showcasing the average emotional range of these actors
How could a guy who "looks like a businessman" do such a thing? After all, people wearing suits are incapable of violence or evil. Dr. Dan decides to investigate, and sexually harasses/flirts with the assistant coroner until she will help him. What do we find out from the coroner lady? The suicidal businessman must have been pretty strong, since he tore his victim's skull apart. Meanwhile, Dr. Dan spends time drinking and watching the same Halloween commercial over and over again.
I'll be completely honest with you: that is what you take from this movie, more than anything else. I hate that song SO MUCH right now. Anyway. Luckily, Dr. Dan is saved from the torture of spending time with his awful chidren and nagging ex-wife when he runs into the murder victim's daughter, Ellie (Stacey Nelkin). She also thinks there is something strange about her father's death and is determined to get to the bottom of things. Together, they leave town and go to Ellie's dad's failing toy store. There, Ellie finds her dad's appointment book and determines that his troubles began when he went to the Silver Shamrock factory, which makes these stupid Halloween masks that all the kids are wearing. Meanwhile, Dr. Dan is acting kind of pervy and creepy toward Ellie.
"Do you think your father would mind if I took that 'Free Mustache Rides' shirt?"
When they arrive at the factory, they take advantage of a very convenient case of mistaken identity to get a tour of the factory from the owner, Mr. Cochran (Dan O'Herlihy). Why would the owner of a company run a brief and detail-free tour? How can a mask company be tied into a murder plot? And how do killer robots and witchcraft come into play? And what does "Season of the Witch" refer to, anyway? Some of those questions --- but certainly not all --- will be answered (poorly) if you choose to watch Halloween III: Season of the Witch!
Still not convinced? I don't blame you
What can I say about the acting in Halloween III: Season of the Witch? Well, Dr. Dan probably says it best in the film's final scene: "STOP IT!!!"
Tom Atkins was pretty horrible in the lead role, taking a role that needed sympathy and heroism and filling it with creepiness and a complete lack of motivation. Dan O'Herlihy was a little better as the closest thing this movie has to a titular witch, but looking mediocre next to the rest of this cast is no big deal. Stacey Nelkin was also halfway decent, if you like vacant stares and 80s hair.
...and/or random lingerie appearances
Her part was pretty horribly written, but there was one scene that I just can't let go of. So, Ellie and Dr. Dan have finally succumbed to the complete lack of sexual tension between them, and had themselves some sexy time. In a post-coital embrace, Dr. Dan asks, "Wait. How old are you?" Her response is, "Relax. I'm older than I look." Just so everyone is clear, our hero had a sudden pang of conscience and worried that he had just committed statutory rape (very hero-like), and her response does absolutely nothing to clear the matter up. If Nelkin had delivered the line with an eyeroll or a rib-jab, I would have taken that to mean that she is over eighteen. Saying it in a breathy voice, however, makes her sound like a child prostitute: "As young as you want me to be." Gross.
The less said about Tommy Lee Wallace's direction and co-writing, the better. Let's just call it annoying and incompetent, and leave it at that. Well, I guess that's where we can leave the direction. The writing is pretty terrible. I'll have to come back to that.
"Ah, yes, the joy on a child's face when he sees the same damn thing over and over again..."
How gruesome can a movie about Halloween masks and seasons be? Actually, there are quite a few death scenes in Halloween III: Season of the Witch. I would argue that there are more kills in this film than in any other Halloween, if you count the killer robots as victims. Speaking of killer robots, did you know that normal humans can punch right through them? It's true. Hell, you can even decapitate them with little effort, provided the robot has the form of an elderly woman. Halloween III also has some fairly unusual deaths in it. My favorite, by far, is the laser-to-the-mouth kill. There are no lasers anywhere else in this film, but poking the wrong thing with a paperclip takes you from bored and frumpy...
Luke Skywalker has had enough of her crap
...to herpes-tacular in a matter of seconds!
Cold sores are disgusting
Halloween III is also one of the few horror movies I have seen where child murder is a large part of the story. I'm not talking about a Mystic River type of story, I'm talking about a movie where the villain's stated purpose is child murder on a large scale. What makes the child murder even more unusual is the form it takes. The masks that are so prominent in the film kill the kids. They go from having a headache...
...to spontaneously shooting out bugs and snakes out of their skull remnants.
Tommy needs a bath
On the one hand, holy crap that kid just died and his head turned into bugs and worms and shit! On the other hand, this is a movie that kills children? That's surprisingly dark, given the Silver Shamrock's 8-bit oompah soundtrack. Judge for yourself:
Oddly enough, Halloween III: Season of the Witch is not remembered for being oddly gruesome or having a darker tone than most other horror movies. It is remembered for being spectacularly bad. Why? Maybe because this horrible, wretched song is replayed at least fifteen times in the damn film. Maybe it's the lack of Michael Myers. Or possibly the shitty acting. Or maybe because the public reacted poorly to child murder.
Nah. These punks are asking for it.
I'm going to place the blame squarely on the writing. Well, the writing, and the Silver Shamrock song. How bad is the writing? The entire premise of this film is based on the idea that all children want to wear the same nasty-ass, petroleum-smelling Halloween masks. Remember that time in elementary school where you decided to dress up as exactly the same thing as your best friend? No? That's because it doesn't happen. The Jack-O-Lantern mask is the last refuge of the poor kid in class that doesn't take baths. In that video above, most of the kids aren't even dressing in costume for Halloween --- they're just wearing their masks. I love the fact that some of the pumpkin mask owners have added snazzy flair, like a witch hat or a Revolutionary War-era hat. Of course, this plot also ignores logic. I'm not going to bother dismissing the Stonehenge angle, because that was handled in such a matter of fact manner that I nearly wet myself. I'm not going to touch upon the magic phone number that a civilian can dial to get multiple TV channels to not air a specific commercial. No, I'm talking about the notion that a company that specializes in cheap seasonal masks would A) have television commercials B) have television commercials on nearly every channel C) update their commercials on a daily basis and D) hire vans with speakers to drive around neighborhoods, telling kids to go watch TV on Halloween. Any one of those ideas at the core of a horror movie would make the film laughable, but when you combine them into one movie, the stupidity reaches such giant proportions that your brain starts to shut down.
Oh, I get it. TV rots your brain.
And that's the worst thing about Halloween III: Season of the Witch. There is simply too much stupidity in this film, so your brain becomes numb in an effort to keep from oozing out of your ears. If the film was halfway competent, this would be howlingly funny, but it's just too much of a bad thing.
Oh, suck it up. YOU read the script. YOU know.
But does Halloween III: Season of the Witch truly deserve its place among the worst movies of all time? I don't think so. It's definitely bad, but there are worse movies, and there are movies in this franchise that I've hated more. I think the notoriety surrounding this film is due entirely to it being the sole Michael Myers-less entry in this franchise. If it was just called "Season of the Witch," it would be a bad movie, perhaps even a forgotten movie, but it wouldn't be notorious. There are actually some elements here that I genuinely like. I really liked the villain's motive, and I liked that he scoffed at needing a reason to do terrible things. I liked that this movie took on the (fairly) taboo task of killing children in the story, and I was impressed with the implications of the ending. Yes, it's a pretty amateurish effort and deserves to be mocked by all that see it, but there are some core elements here that could ("could" being the operative word) make for a truly frightening horror movie. As a legit film, Halloween III receives a fairly generous:
However, for the truly bold and sarcastic, Halloween III: Season of the Witch has enough pleasure and pain to make Pinhead happy. I recommend jaded friends, Rifftrax, and/or a large bottle of rum. Because scotch should be enjoyed. Lefty Gold score of...
I
like to watch films with very little or no foreknowledge of what is in
store. I like to be surprised. So, when I stumbled across a listing
for Ziegfeld Follies on TCM, I immediately programmed my DVR to
record it. My cable provider gave the film four stars and it had
William Powell in a non-Nick Charles role? I was intrigued. And only
minutes after I began watching, I was utterly confused.
Ziegfeld Follies opens with Florenz Ziegfeld (William Powell)
lounging around what appears to be a luxury suite in Heaven. While
Ziegfeld appears to enjoy being dead, he also wistfully wonders aloud
what a great show he could put on with the current crop of famous
talent. In case you didn't know --- and if you are under the age of 70,
that's not terribly surprising --- Ziegfeld was a real person who
masterminded a string of high-profile, star-studded musical/comedy/dance
revues on Broadway, in the 1910s and 20s. Ziegfeld's reminisces are
brought to life by some sort of puppetry/stop-motion animation, which
features (among many things) holy-shit-that's-racist portrayals of
Native Americans and blacks. How racist is it? You know those Tom & Jerry scenes that have been edited out of television broadcasts for the last twenty-odd years? Worse than that.
If only because the "joke" wasn't caused by an explosion
You may rightly wonder why the hell there are puppets
onscreen at this point, and that's a valid concern. It won't be
answered in this film, but I can guarantee that it won't be referenced
again, either, so...there's that. You see, Fred Astaire shows up, as himself, on a stage and explains that Ziegfeld had a magic touch for entertainment and racism. This segues into a song (naturally), which transitions into Lucille Ball giving some S&M treatment to a crowd of Batman villain cosplayers.
She's gonna have some 'splainin' to do
Oddly, Ball --- arguably the most famous comedienne
ever --- doesn't have a line of dialogue or any physical comedy bits.
She just looks bitchy and cracks a whip at Catwomen. That's not even
close to the only bizarre choice made in Ziegfeld Follies, but it
won't bother you for long; after a few minutes, it is time for a new
bit, with only a title card serving as a transition from one act to the
next. After all, that is what is going on here; this is a collection of
unrelated musical and comedic bits thrown together to wow the audience
with glitz, glamor, and star power. How much star power, you ask? Fred
Astaire stars in several bits, but you also get to see Judy Garland, Esther Williams, Gene Kelly, Lena Horne, Red Skelton --- and those are just the ones I recognized without doing any research!
To be perfectly frank, I had no idea when I watched Ziegfeld Follies
who Ziegfeld was or what his Follies were. I was also unaware that
William Powell played Ziegfeld once before, in the 1936 Best Picture
winner, The Great Ziegfeld. Even armed with that knowledge, I
don't think I would have been prepared for the sheer ridiculousness of
this movie. Oh, you think The Hunger Games had some odd costumes? Consider this check and mate.
I'm not even going to bother explaining the scene
where dozens of pretty girls may or may not have been suffocated by soap
bubbles. But that's okay, there are a ton of ill-advised scenes in
this revue. Do you love comedy sketches that are about ***snicker***
how annoying telephone operators are? Hmm...okay, maybe that doesn't
translate very well into the modern age. How about lawyer jokes? Maybe
some 1940s fake drunken acting? No? Okay, you're a viewer with
discriminating tastes --- here's a gift for you:
Yes,
that is Fred Astaire, wearing heavy makeup and playing a stereotypical
Chinaman. The racist puppets were kind of surprising, but this...damn,
Fred! I could excuse you somewhat if this was a really cool song or
dance number --- it's not like they had a lot of Asians in Hollywood at
the time, much less singing and dancing ones --- but it's really slow
and boring, plus offensive to modern tastes.
I don't want to give the impression that Ziegfeld Follies
is just a collection of what-were-they-thinking sketches. To be fair,
there are a number of charming acts. For instance, I had never seen
Esther Williams (outside of a few MGM montages) before, and her
underwater scenes were interesting. I don't quite understand how her
swimming choreography became popular in movies, but I have to admit that
some of it looked pretty.
...and some of it looked like Minority Report murders
Fred Astaire, when he wasn't busy offending Asians,
was pretty entertaining in a few dance numbers. Notably, this was the
first and only time he and Gene Kelly danced together on film in their
prime. While I didn't care for any of the songs in Ziegfeld Follies --- which I was surprised at, given the star power in the film --- the dancing sequences were pretty impressive.
Perhaps not the best screenshot to capture that sentiment
I also liked Judy Garland's spoof of serious
actresses. It wasn't a great song, but the sentiment was kind of funny;
it was more of a style over substance bit, but I was surprised to see
such sharp barbs aimed at the same people who bring prestige to their
projects.
"Drama!" - a more or less direct quote
Almost every scene had a different director, with only Vincente Minnelli and George Sydney handling multiple scenes. Robert Lewis, Lemuel Ayers, Roy Del Ruth, Charles Walters, and Merrill Pye
round out the rest of the directors in this film. Not surprisingly,
the different directors only emphasized the disjointed nature of this
film; even if there had not been title cards separating each scene, the
difference is style was very noticeable. I wasn't very impressed with
any of the directors, but I will admit that (as a whole) the group used
some pretty high-end sets. Not every set, mind you --- they ranged from
opulent to minimalist --- but there were enough "wow" moments to stick
with you.
Ziegfeld Follies was probably never
meant to stand the test of time, but that is the issue modern viewers
are faced with. On the one hand, this is a movie that feels like the
sort of thing you would have seen in Manhattan in the 1920s. The dance
sequences are pretty well done and the songs (while not memorable) are
inoffensive. On the other hand, every single attempt at humor fails
miserably, the dance sequences never blow your mind, and the songs are
mediocre and not very famous. When you add that amount of underwhelming
to something that is hodgepodge, without the semblance of story, and
add a generous heaping of WTF, the result is less than magical. There
are only a few shining lights in this movie to justify anything
approaching a respectable rating, but the randomness, the racism, and
the absolutely wretched comedy in Ziegfeld Follies makes for a soul-sucking experience.
Oh, and William Powell is only in the opening scene? What the hell?!? He is the only reason I watched this damn thing!
I have established a routine of reviewing the best and worst of the previous year just in time for the Oscars. If they can wait until the end of February, why can't I, right? That means that I am trying to fit a lot of 2011 releases in for review in January and February. Hence Faces in the Crowd. Normally, I wouldn't touch a Milla Jovovich movie with a ten foot pole, unless it involved killing zombies. That's just a general rule that has served me well over the years. Faces in the Crowd is what happens when you break the rules.
...and this is what happens when you break her concentration: blank stares
Here's the plot: Anna (Milla Jovovich) is living the good life --- she has friends, a handsome byofriend, and is a successful teacher with model-quality looks --- until she accidentally witnesses a serial killer in the act. She tries to escape, and I suppose she does; she falls off a bridge, into a body of water, hitting her head on the way down. That might scramble a lesser person's brains, but Anna's got quite the noggin and emerges with prosopagnosia. That's essentially a form of brain damage that prevents a person from recognizing faces. In practice, that means that Anna sees a new face whenever a person leaves the room; in practice, her boyfriend looks different every morning and every evening as he returns from work. My immediate thought --- echoed by Anna's slutty friend --- is that she gets to be monogamous and still sleep with new people, but this isn't a lighthearted sex romp. This is a drama, nay, a thriller, dammit! So Anna has witnessed a serial killer at work and is the only surviving witness, but she couldn't ID the guy if he was standing right next to her. That would only be mildly inconvenient, if it wasn't for the fact that the killer is stalking her at close range.
ACTING!
Wow. Faces in the Crowd takes an interesting phenomenon and completely misses the mark. The first problem I have with this movie is with Milla Jovovich. She can't act. Not surprised, not happy, not afraid, not disinterested, not mildly constipated. If you cast Milla Jovovich in your movie and are expecting her to carry a dramatic role (as in, "not one where the acting is obscured by action FX") you damn well better make sure she is clothed appropriately.
An example of "appropriate"
Man, she is terrible here. She plays a schoolteacher that regularly goes out drinking with her slutty wannabe Sex In the City friends, never seems to grade papers, and looks like this when she's stressed:
I'm surprised this movie's not titled Faces Acting Subtly. The rest of the cast is better than Milla, but so was my preschool class performance of the Billy Goats Gruff (I was a troll and fussed over having green makeup on my cheeks, because makeup is for girls! Yuck!). Julian McMahon plays the cop tracking down the serial killer that magically seems immune to Anna's mental disability; she recognizes his face every time! It's not that remarkable, though...his goatee is just that awful.
Not a Robin Hood remake
The rest of the cast is a mixed bag. Due to the requirements of the story, most of the characters were played by multiple actors. So, even if you love The Walking Dead's Sarah Wayne Callies, she's only actually in about ten percent of this movie. Similarly, Valentina Vargas was not given much of a chance to shine as the super-slutty foreign friend, even though the character had Isabella Rosellini-in-Roger Dodger-potential. As for David Atrakchi...let's just say that it's too bad he never got substituted for Demitri Martin in this movie. (That is me subtly pointing out his lack of dramatic acting chops). Oh, and Marianne Faithfull shows up to play a cynical therapist, if only to rasp at a new audience.
Faces in the Crowd isn't all bad, though. It's pretty terrible, don't get me wrong, but there were some things I liked. I liked the concept behind this movie. Who do you trust when you can't trust your eyes? I like that. And writer/director Julien Magnat found an interesting way to manifest Anna's disability, by having different actors play the same part, with the original actor supplying the voice. Sometimes, strangers would all share the same face. That was all pretty cool. It's too bad that the acting is wretched and the basic plot (the mystery) is hammy and predictable.
Don't protect her. She needs to hear the truth.
What's worse than all that is how ridiculous the plot is. First of all, I hated how easily the story got rid of Anna's existing boyfriend, who suddenly became a total prick when his girlfriend suffered brain damage. Here is an attractive woman who is clearly trying her best to fake her way through life, despite a mental retardation, and he gets self-righteous? Weak. I mean, this is a guy who could totally berate and take out his anger on his girlfriend, just by changing his tie and using a silly voice, the very stuff of a Wayans Brothers comedy --- and he gives that up because she sees different faces when they have sex? What planet is he from? And then there is the cop played by McMahon, who explicitly denies Anna protective custody (despite her being his only witness) because it is a paperwork hassle.
"I'd take my hands out of my pockets, but, you know...red tape"
The plot is so cheesy that Anna reads her horoscope out loud, ferchrissakes, and it always applies to her day!
Scorpio: "You will smoosh your face in despair..."
One of the worst things about Faces in the Crowd is how pointlessly long it is. This isn't a long movie, mind you, but there is a point where it is obvious that the killer character is wearing exactly the same clothes as Anna's boyfriend, and the boyfriend sees the guy, and Anna's friend gets killed that night by someone wearing the exact same clothes as the boyfriend ---- and nobody thinks to ask the boyfriend what this doppelganger looks like! I would have been satisfied if the boyfriend gave a mediocre description, but ignoring the fact that he saw the killer bugged the hell out of me. All of that pales in comparison to the idiocy of Anna's character when she tried to go back to teaching young schoolchildren. She went back to work without telling her boss about her condition and apparently walked into class without a game plan to handle not recognizing the faces of 30+ kids. As a friend, sibling, nephew, and son of teachers, I have to call bullshit there. For all the work teachers do off the clock, I simply cannot believe that an elementary school teacher wouldn't foresee the problem of not recognizing her students, especially when her boss references her as his "best" teacher. Faces in the Crowd takes a decent premise and dumbs it down into a dull, poorly paced thriller that doesn't even deserve quotation marks around it.
The one good thing that resulted from me watching this movie was that it reminded me of Marianne Faithfull's 2002 album, which featured this song, written by Jarvis Cocker. Sure, it's dirty and he covered it on his next solo album, but this is where I heard it first.
With my month-long focus on horror movies, I was faced with an important decision. Should I finish up my coverage of my favorite slasher series, Friday the 13th, or should I focus on classics and films unknown to me? Last year, I reviewed the first four Fridays for my month of horror and then randomly reviewed the fifth, saving Part VI for this year's actual Friday the 13th. There was something poetic about that last review that warmed the cockles of my heart. Since 2012 has three (!) Friday the 13ths on the way, I figure that if I review Part VII this month, I will be able to warm those same cockles three times next year and finish up my coverage of the series. With a solid plan in mind, I rented Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood --- the Friday I have watched the least.
The New Blood starts out, like so many other Fridays, with a recap. In case you are tuning in without having seen and taken scrupulous notes on the previous six films, here's the gist: Jason Voorhies either drowned in Crystal Lake or he didn't as a child; his mom went crazy years later and killed some camp councilors; but then Jason turned out to be alive, just a super-strong killer hobo; he was eventually killed by Corey Feldman; then there was a movie where he actually stayed dead; he was later brought back to life by lightning; and he was left chained to a rock at the bottom of Crystal Lake at the end of Part VI. Now you're probably more caught up on the series than the screenwriter for The New Blood. This chapter begins with a family that happens to live on Crystal Lake. Why would you live in an area notorious for its mass murdering? Well, it is a nice lake. The dad is drunk and abusive to his wife and kid, so his daughter, Tina, decides to run away...in the middle of the night...on a boat. Tina's not the brightest bulb. Luckily, she has abilities that make up for her deficiency in the brains department; Tina has psychokinetic powers. When her dad comes down to the pier to coax her back home, Tina "accidentally" crushes the pier with her mind, killing her father.
Which is why all children should have choke collars
Fast-forward ten years, and Tina (Lar Park-Lincoln) still feels shitty about using her mind bullets (that's telekinesis, Kyle) to murder her father. Since psychokinetic abilities are not an ordinary fact, it is assumed by Tina's mother, Amanda (prolific voice actress Susan Blu), that she is just a little crazy. Enter Doctor Crews (Terry Kiser, better known as the Bernie you spend your weekends with). The doc is fascinated by Tina's abilities and desperately wants to document them and profit from exploiting her; he decides that the best way to tap into her powers is to bring her back to the home where she killed her father, on Crystal Lake.
Pictured above: Bernie, sans mustache, and a blonde helmet
I wonder what happens next? Actually...yeah, you should wonder. Jason Voorhies has apparently been dead and under water for about a decade (which means that this 1988 movie is supposed to happen in 2002, by my math): what could possibly bring him back? Well, Tina gets stressed out in one of her sessions with the doctor and runs out to the pier where it all happened. She reaches out with her mind, where she finds...something...and does...something...with her mind --- and promptly passes out. Tina thought she was resurrecting her father (more on that later), but she accidentally reanimated Jason and somehow broke the chains that bound him. What will this soggy Super Zombie Jason do with his new lease on life?
Hint, hint
Oh, yeah...I forgot to mention the dozen teens next door participating in drugs, alcohol, and premarital sex. It's time for Jason to make his right-wing political views known! JV in 2012!
It shouldn't be a surprise that the actors in Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood are not of the highest caliber. Aside from the adults in the cast, the only teens that would go on to star in anything noteworthy are Larry Cox (who had bit parts in a couple of real movies) and Jeff Bennett (the voice of Johnny Bravo). That's not exactly a stellar cast, especially when you consider that Terry Kiser is most famous for playing a dead man. On the bright side, this is the first time Kane Hodder, the only man to play Jason multiple times, donned the mask. Does Hodder make a big difference? That's debatable. Still, as the actor who embodied Super Zombie Jason for more than a decade, I think his debut is worth noting.
Is this really what they thought the 2000s would look like?
On the subject of Jason, I must admit that this might be the film with the best-looking Jason. The goalie mask had been around for a while, and Jason's basic ensemble (a dirty jumpsuit) had been in place for a few movies, but The New Blood's costume and makeup team really did a great job with the character this time. In no other film does Jason look quite so menacing. That may be due to the fact that you his mask is damaged and you can catch glimpses of his lip-less teeth, or it may be because his body looks gross and water-logged, with his ribs and knuckles poking past the skin, visible through his tattered clothing. Whatever the specifics, this is the first time Jason really looks like an unstoppable killing machine. Either that, or he's bulimic.
"Thin is pretty!"
As for the rest of the movie, it's all pretty silly. As much as I like looking at this Jason, this is definitely one of the worst entries in the series. While there are a pretty good number of kills (fourteen), most of them are heavily edited; apparently, the filmmakers had to do some creative editing to avoid an "X" rating. That means that there are many shots of Jason striking and then there is a cut to the dead body after the attack. The most infamous example of this is with the sleeping bag kill; in theaters, Jason slammed a sleeping bag (with a person in it, of course) into a tree six times, but the VHS and subsequent DVD releases only feature one hit.
Lame
Aside from that scene, the editing prevents there from being any other interesting kills. The New Blood also features the welcome return of Friday the 13th nudity, where nubile young women get naked because they want to be murdered.
If you moon Jason, kiss your ass goodbye
Director John Carl Buechler is better known for his work as a premier special effects and makeup man than for his direction, and it shows. As I mentioned earlier, Jason Voorhies looks fantastic and scary. This movie also features the best facemask-less Jason-face.
Although it's not pretty
Tina's psychokinetic abilities require moving things without the audience seeing how. Buechler delivers in those areas. Unfortunately, working with actors appears to be a mystery to him. There are a lot of characters in this film, and all of them are underdeveloped. Most of the characters are thoroughly unlikable and all of them make idiotic choices. I'm fine with that, since it's a given that Jason will murder them in turn. What bugs me is that the editing in this film made the story stupider than it needed to be:
A guy and a girl are having sex in a van outside the cabin. The guy wonders aloud why they are doing it in the van, instead of in the cabin. It is his uncle's cabin, after all. No answer is provided. No answer is implied --- the cabin sure doesn't look crowded. And the next time we see the van, a different couple is sexing it up in the same sleeping bag. Eww.
Tina tells her love interest that she's crazy, and she acts like it. The guy, who is merely an acquaintance, keeps pursuing her, even though another girl is constantly hitting on him. I'm going to make a generalization about men: if a woman says she's crazy, the guy generally says "Good luck with that" and moves on.
A bitchy girl tells her love interest --- who keeps rejecting her --- that all is fair in love and war. He responds that he doesn't even like her. Her reply: "'Like' has nothing to do with it." So...all is fair in the quest for physical pleasure, then?
The requisite nerd girl has a crush on the druggie rebel. Her friend decides to start drinking and doing drugs to make him like her; it works and they start screwing. Nerd girl decides to fight fire with fire by giving herself an 80s makeover and then leaves her room --- in the cabin, mind you, clearly just upstairs from the party below --- and the next thing you know, she is outside, looking for druggie rebel in the woods. Huh? Shouldn't she be calling out druggie boy's name and entering his bedroom, where Jason will kill her? Did she take the fire exit or something? And why would he be in the woods? But wait! In the woods, she loses an earring. Oh, no! Jason's going to kill her while she tries to find it, right? Actually, no. Nerd girl finds her earring A) without her glasses B) in the dark C) in the woods. What the hell kind of scene is this supposed to be? I'm so confused.
A couple in having sexy time in the van, when someone (hint: it rhymes with "Mason") bumps into the vehicle. The pair assumes that it is one of their friends, arriving late to the party. The guy decides to stop having sex, gets dressed, and leaves the van to greet his buddy. After waiting a few moments, the girl does the same thing. That just boggles my mind. First off, who decides to interrupt their sex for some idle chitchat? Secondly, isn't it a little awkward to greet a friend when you have an erection? I just love that both the guy and girl were so bored with their sexual progress that they quit with such a weak excuse.
Why does Tina's mother look like Bruce McCulloch in drag? It has nothing to do with the direction or editing, but it is still weird.
Mommy Dearest
And you'll notice that my list of stupid doesn't even mention the fact that the heroine has psychic abilities. Or the fact that SPOILER ALERT: she somehow resurrects her dead father to kill Jason. Because her father was still in the lake. Because the police wouldn't drag a lake to find a drowning victim. Whatever, it's so stupid. He doesn't even look like he died that day, much less been at the bottom of a lake for a decade! Okay, I'm done now. These scenes would be stupid enough normally, but many of them seemed like they were going in one direction, only to completely change, mid-scene, and ignore what came before. That's just inept. Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood isn't very good. It has all the stupidity of Part V, but without the humor and without the cool gore of the better entries in the series. While I want to cut the filmmakers some slack, since this movie was obviously butchered in post-production, they didn't do a good enough job of making this entertaining. I will argue that, despite the cool makeup for Jason, that this is one of the worst entries in a series that isn't very demanding.
