IT Trailer (2017)

     I had doubts at first, but I have to say I'm pretty fucking stoked about this film.

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3: DREAM WARRIORS

     A young teenage girl is haunted by terrible dreams of Freddy Krueger, which leads her to a psychiatric ward chock full of troubled kids- all of whom are being haunted by the evil madman...
   

       A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3: DREAM WARRIORS is almost universally known as one of the best and most-loved of the ELM STREET films- yet I've honestly never been a huge fan of this one, or any that followed, for that matter. I hadn't watched DREAM WARRIORS in ages and was recently in a mood for it, so I dug out my copy the other day and gave it a whirl for old time's sakes. The film is fun... but it's just kinda lame to me now. The magic of the original is long gone, if you ask me.

     When the original A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET was released in '84, it truly did breath new life into the horror genre. I immediately loved it and it quickly became a Friday night staple alongside such time-honored slashers as HALLOWEEN and FRIDAY THE 13TH. I owned the original film on VHS twice, with numerous DVD versions throughout the years as well. I even enjoyed the strangely homoerotic sequel, with all its faults. Which brings us to part 3.

      I remember in high school when DREAM WARRIORS came out and people went absolutely nuts over it- but I was just sitting there all quietly underwhelmed, to be perfectly honest. I liked the film... but I wasn't blown away from it, like I was the original and even the sequel. This one left me feeling kinda blah. As a horror film, that is. (Now as a wonderfully wacky time capsule of 1987 with that extra-helping of late 80's cheese that you know exactly what I'm talking about- it excels. As a comedy, it works great- especially since the film makers decided to inexplicably turn Freddy Krueger into a wise-cracking comedian tossing out one-liners and jokes for days.) I just never found it remotely scary, that's all. Silly, yes. Scary, no.

     By all accounts, I should love DREAM WARRIORS, and I occasionally find myself in the mood to watch it... so I do, and find myself cringing way too much. Let's be real here- many horror films from the latter half of the 80's haven't aged well when viewed today, and DREAM WARRIORS is a perfect example of this. It's downright hokey at times, and some of the effects and scenes come across as rather silly. For whatever reason, horror films from the first part of the decade have a certain dark, grainy charm that holds up today, but was lost in the bright lights and garish color schemes that permeated so many of the scary movies from say, 1986 and on.

     Now there's some great touches in DREAM WARRIORS. For one, Nancy Langenkamp makes a welcome return as Nancy and is every bit as likable as she was in the original. She's now a psychiatrist who specializes in dreams,and immediately takes Kirsten under her wing to battle the return of Freddy Krueger. 80's cult actor Craig Wasson plays Dr. Neil Goldman at the psychiatric ward and devours any scenery in a ten foot radius as always. There's some fun cameos this time around, such as Zsa Zsa Gabor and Dick Cavett, but at the end of the day they're unnecessary and distracting. They also let you know that Freddy Krueger was very much a huge mainstream icon by the time this film was released- whereas the very first ELM STREET felt much more like a low-budget, independent film. Because it was, and that somehow made it much scarier.

     One cannot deny that Chuck Russell does a pretty good job directing the shenanigans on Elm Street this time around, and the dream sequences were huge hits with audiences in 1987. I just didn't love this one, popular opinion be damned. Go read the comments on this film on any given site and you'll see breathless reviews raving at how terrifying and awesome and close to the original the third installment is, and I disagree with all of that. Sure it's a well-made film and I'm not trying to purposely hate on it- I don't hate the film at all. I just don't find it the least bit frightening and the overall tone of the film is nothing like the original- to me, FREDDY'S REVENGE was far more like the original than part 3, in terms of overall atmosphere. The original film and the sequel still treated Freddy as truly evil with no sense of humor whatsoever- and kept him mostly in the dark to keep him mysterious. Not in this one. Freddy is front and center with a newfound treasure trove of sarcastic one-liners that's honestly just irritating and saps the film of any real impact. This one is just too corny and many of the special effects are just too over-the-top at times for it to be taken fully seriously. But to each his own I suppose.

     To me, DREAM WARRIORS is more of a camp classic than an outright horror film, with far more humor to be found in it than horror. And I think making Freddy a sassy slasher with quippy zingers only adds to the lightened mood and in turn takes it away from the darker tones and mood of the first two films. Which is a bummer to me. Here, he's just not scary anymore. Fun, to be sure... but this was when I started losing interest in the ELM STREET films. Around '87 and '88 I was much more interested in seeing FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 7: A NEW BLOOD and HALLOWEEN 4: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS. To me, the magic was over. 3 can be lots of fun to go back and laugh at, hell even 2 can be a hoot and a half at times- especially with the right crowd and party favors. The first film was always the only truly scary one of the franchise anyways, and you all know it.

 

Suspiria Soundtrack 09 - Suspiria (Celesta And Bells)

Jason on the Lam

    Okay, so the change in Jason's look in each FRIDAY THE 13TH film has always bothered me, particularly the transition from PART 2 to PART 3. The second sequel is supposed to take place immediately after 2 ends, as Ginny is wheeled away in an ambulance in the very last scene of that first sequel. I recently watched PART 2 again on blu-ray, and I noticed something I'd never noticed before. Right before the opening credits of PART 3, we see Jason still lying on the floor of his lair, pulling out the machete Ginny struck him with. Jason is still dressed in the plaid shirt and overalls he sported in PART 2, right?

     But then after the funky opening credits, we see Jason immediately creeping the general store. But what I had never realized watching the film a thousand times before on dreary VHS was that Jason is standing by the clothesline behind the general store right after the opening credits of 3 still in his outfit from PART 2- except he's now bald again.

      I had always assumed he was already wearing the green jacket and khaki pants, but he was obviously at the general store to get a change of clothes, as we see him standing at the clothes line. Was Jason eluding the authorities by changing clothes? Is that why he shaved his head? Would Jason even have the mental capacity to know to run from the law? This all sort of blew my mind as it was so obvious to me suddenly. I've literally watched this movie a million and one times and never did I once think of this.

     Now remember in PART 2, Ginny had never actually seen Jason until the very end when she and Paul pull the bag back to see his face. WE the audience never see his face, until he jumps through the window and grabs Ginny back at the camp. When we finally do see Jason, he's sporting a rather shocking head of long, red hair. Now when Jason drowns as a child in the original, we see him bald. So is the hairy Jason who bursts through that window just a figment of Ginny's imagination? He would have to be, as we plainly see Jason at the beginning of PART 3 still back in his lair in the woods pulling the machete out of him. Or is it though?

     The ending of the first two FRIDAY THE 13TH sequels both have a dreamlike, ambiguous feel to them, much like the ending of the original. Did Jason really jump out of the lake at the end of the first movie and drag Alice down into Camp Crystal Lake, or was it all just a dream? Did Jason really crash through that window and grab Ginny at the end of PART 2? Where is Paul when they whisk Ginny away- did he become a victim of Jason? We see Paul leave Jason's shack with Ginny, but Ginny is deliriously asking "Where's Paul?" on the stretcher, so it's all somewhat confusing. Was Paul killed in Jason's shack or back at the cabin?  We may never know, kids.

THE NESTING

    Remember back in the 1980's when you'd go into your local video store,  looking for that perfect horror movie to rent on a Friday night?  I sure do, and there was always a particular VHS that stood out, taunting me with its lurid and catchy cover art. That film was THE NESTING, and for some reason I never rented it, or even caught it on HBO. I have no idea why I never saw this film. Well kids, I finally broke down and watched it recently- and you know what?  I actually loved it. Largely ignored and dismissed upon its initial release in 1981 due to the slasher craze going on at the time, THE NESTING is actually a solid and very entertaining ghost story that offers up a plucky-yet-unstable heroine, a kinky back story, and some stylish directing.

     THE NESTING  tells the tale of big city thriller novelist Lauren Cochran (Robin Groves) who suffers from anxiety attacks and is diagnosed with agoraphobia. Lauren decides a country retreat to finish working on her new novel is just what the doctor ordered, and begins house hunting. She mysteriously finds herself drawn to a house identical to the one she's currently writing about in her new novel "The Nesting", a strange, octagonal mansion that used to be a brothel and was the site of a horrible bloodbath years ago. How does plucky author Lauren Cochran know this?  Well see, she immediately begins having dreams and visions of the house- and being a horror movie, everyone around her starts dying mysterious and horrible deaths, of course. What does the house want with her? Will she escape the evil clutches of the house, or become a permanent and ghostly fixture there?

     While watching THE NESTING, several other films immediately sprung to mind, as it's basically a mish-mash of THE SENTINEL, THE CHANGELING,and THE HAUNTING OF JULIA. And that's what makes it so much fun to watch.  The film has acquired a rather negative reputation over the years, and I'm gonna chalk most of that up to the downright dreadful VHS transfer we were all stuck with in the 80's and 90's- dark, muddy, cropped, and distorted, very much like the original VHS transfers of  HUMOUNGOUS, THE FINAL TERROR and CURTAINS where you truly couldn't tell what was going on in half the movie. THE NESTING looks sensational on blu-ray, kids.

    It's somewhat bumpy in parts,but overall it's a solid little shocker from 1981, and surprisingly holds up rather well today. I really enjoyed the kinetic and somewhat-unhinged musical score, and genre favorites John Carradine and Gloria Grahame pop up in memorable cameos.  Robin Groves is a very likeable heroine, the house itself is genuinely creepy, and the whole thing has a deliciously lurid context to it, as the film was directed by adult filmmaker Armand Weston.  Contrived and familiar? Sure. But still a lot of fun to watch.

   THE NESTING was part of that whole supernatural shocker craze permeating the late 70's and early 80's, especially after the success of THE AMITYVILLE HORROR in 1979.  I'm glad I finally gave in and watched it, and really enjoyed this one for what it was, and although I wouldn't go as far to say I discovered a lost classic here, I've seen far worse and I'll definitely be adding this blu-ray to my collection. Indeed.

VHS HALL OF FAME- STEPHEN KING

THE SHINING Trailer

     I'm so jealous of the audiences that were sitting in a dark theater in 1980 and saw this trailer. Not knowing it was coming, not knowing what it was all about- only knowing that it was disturbing. I'm fairly certain I would be obsessed with seeing this movie after experiencing this clip on the big screen.

HALLOWEEN- BEHIND THE SCENES

     John Carpenter's HALLOWEEN is one of my all-time favorite films- it's not even a movie to me, since I first saw it way back when, it's always been presented to me as myth, legend, if you guys know what I mean. A tale to be passed down, told to huddled children to frighten them to death if you will. Very much like FRIDAY THE 13TH was, while we're yapping about it. It was always hard for me to imagine a man directing actors playing residents of Haddonfield, IL being stalked by a creepy killer, and it's even more surreal today seeing all these amazing behind-the-scenes pics you have before you, thanks to that nifty ole' internetz. I don't know about you kids but I've never seen 90% of these photos before and it's rocking my face off.

Whatever Happened to the Strodes?

     So while watching HALLOWEEN 2 recently on blu-ray ('tis the season...), something struck me as rather odd that I'd never thought of before.  When Laurie is taken to Haddonfield Memorial, she is asked about her parents by Mrs. Elrod. It's mentioned that her parents were at the same party as Dr. Mixter, but we never hear about them again. I find this all rather strange.

     Surely one would think that even after leaving a party, they would hear the news about the horrific attacks by Michael Myers- Haddonfield is a small town so you would think they would know their daughter is hospitalized after being attacked by a knife-wielding madman. Right?