Category Archives: Intermission

Reading Material: Brute Force: Animal Horror Movies

If the Vanessa Morgan-edited (and highly recommended) When Animals Attack: The 70 Best Horror Movies with Killer Animals were your Intro 101 to the naughty-nature subgenre, consider Dominic Lennard’s Brute Force: Animal Horror Movies the subsequent AP class.

Part of SUNY Press’ Horizons of Cinema series (as was Lennard’s Bad Seeds and Holy Terrors: The Child Villains of Horror Film of 2015), Brute Force examines the be(a)st that Hollywood and off-Hollywood movies have to offer in depicting man’s battle against eight-, six-, four- and no-legged creatures. This type of terror resonates because, Lennard writes, it “hits us with a radical demotion” on the scale of superiority — not to mention the food chain.

He may discuss the sexual politics of 1976’s King Kong and the gender depiction of bears, but don’t mistake Brute Force as a force of boredom or wokeness; it’s a lively and spirited discussion of a particular and peculiar kind of flick. In other words, the contents contain a serious — and seriously engaging — mix of film criticism analysis that just so happens to include Sharknado — y’know, the Syfy shitnado in which, “as the film’s title promises, we see a great swirling tornado flinging sharks around its perimeter.”

Amid chapters on killer insects, snakes and dogs, Lennard takes a mid-book break to focus not on a member of the animal kingdom, but on the eyes — both for the subgenre’s use of shots from the predator’s POV (as in Michael Wadleigh’s Wolfen) and for those creatures’ propensity to pluck out our peepers (as in Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds).

Lennard’s writing style exhibits humor without snark (“Dark lord among diminutive of terrors is of course the spider”), often coming across as deadpan — a real plus. Other than Brute Force’s investment-style price, the only quibble I have with it is the author’s occasional misclassification of movies to fit the theme; never have I ever heard of The Edge or The Grey or The Ghost and the Darkness referred to as anything but adventure thrillers. Alas, I’m more than willing to throw him a bone. —Rod Lott

Get it at Amazon.

The Amityville Horror / The Amityville Curse: Fact & Fiction

It is one of horror’s most classic premises: “George and Kathy Lutz moved into 112 Ocean Avenue on December 18. Twenty-eight days later, they fled in terror.” We speak, of course, of Jay Anson’s The Amityville Horror. If there’s one good thing about the less-than-successful film remake starring Ryan Reynolds, it’s that its 2005 release finally put Anson’s 1977 novel (?) back into print.

My first exposure to the book was shortly after its debut, when the young woman babysitting me and my brothers for the night brought it with her to read. I was creeped out by the illustration of the houseflies that occasionally dotted its pages (sadly missing from Pocket Star’s reprint edition). I read it a few years later, before I saw the 1979 movie, and – what with all the unexplained voices, toilet goo, evil faces, telephone interference, loud noises, dead Indians*, levitation and flaming red pig eyes – it scared the bejeezus out of me.

Revisiting it today, I’m not sure why. Anson’s documentary-style approach prevents it from approaching real terror. There’s simply no tension. Anson will be describing some utterly mundane activity for several paragraphs and then throw in an exclamation like “Father Mancuso returned to his apartment to find a stupefying odor of human excrement pervading his room!” It’s not shocking, because it comes from nowhere, but every time you spot an exclamation point, know that Anson wants goosebumps to follow.

Even though Anson’s you-are-there prose isn’t exactly lively, the story remains compelling after all these years. Even people who’ve neither read the book nor seen the movies can relay freely at least some details surrounding the Amityville legend. But even the initiated probably don’t recall how clunky the book actually is, like this doozy of a sentence, which would be laugh-out-loudable in any book: “Regardless of the weakness he still felt in his loins from the diarrhea, George wanted to make love to Kathy.”

And that mental image, my friends, is far scarier than any poltergeist or possession.

Parapsychologist Hans Holzer really hates Jay Anson’s The Amityville Horror. He refers to it as “sensational” – and not in a good way – and won’t even name its author. After all, Anson’s book is considered fiction, but Holzer believes in the spirits that reportedly have plagued the famous Long Island home. So he wrote his own version.

Long out of print, that nonfiction study from 1979 has been combined with Holzer’s two all-but-lost Amityville fictional efforts from ’82 and ’85 for Barnes & Noble’s three-in-one collection The Amityville Curse: Fact & Fiction. When it comes to competition from Holzer, Anson had nothing to worry about.

It opens with Murder in Amityville, a factual examination not of the Lutz family’s experience in the home (as depicted in the blockbuster ’70s movie) but of Ronald DeFeo, the 22-year-old man who took a shotgun to all six members of his family one night in 1974 (as depicted in the fiercely underrated and unjustly derided Amityville II). The reason? Spiritual possession!

“The only logical explanation for such behavior seems to be the transference of knowledge or skills from an outside source — an outside entity functioning in another dimension.” Why is this the “only” logical explanation? Because Holzer says so. “In all this uncertainty,” he writes, “only one thing is certain: No ‘demons’ are involved, because, unlike spirits, they are strictly figments of the imagination.”

And that’s the way it goes: His way or the highway, as every dig at Anson and others’ work is tinged with a palpable level of “I’ll show them!”-style arrogance and jealousy. It’s all for nothing, because Murder is terribly boring – a true-crime compilation of court transcripts and psychiatric interviews, which is hardly the interesting part of the Amityville story.

But at least it’s competently written compared to the abomination of his would-be novel The Amityville Curse. You can tell how ridiculous it is just from the setup: Three couples who know of the house’s horrible history decide to buy it, move in together and don’t leave once bad shit starts to pile on, even when that includes death. Even hiring an American Indian (named Black Eagle; good one, Hans – that’s not patronizing at all) to cleanse the spirits doesn’t help.

Holzer provides one Shocking Event after another, but because he cannot build suspense, it’s all rather pedestrian. Consider this supposedly terrifying passage of supernatural phenomena:

“The flour bin moved to the edge of the shelf, its top jerked open, and the contents poured out on the stove, creating a large white cloud. … The stove was completely covered with flour, and had to be washed. Undoubtedly, their meal would have to be cold.”

Not exactly pig eyes in the window, huh? Notice how that last line bursts with unintentional humor, as does “Good. Then I must tell you that building houses on Native American burial grounds is not the greatest of ideas.” Or, after a woman’s father is impaled to death by an “Oriental dagger,” “Well, it looks like we paid that medicine man for nothing.”

The narrative is repetitious; witness a doctor’s advice of “Or rather his curse, like a guided missile, will follow you,” and then, a mere 12 pages later, “You see, Mr. White, a curse is a little like a guided missile.” But laziness is Holzer’s greatest sin, like when the character of Frank accidentally kills the spouse of Lucille. Thank goodness it was only a spouse: “Lucille had refused to leave her room or even talk to anyone. … She was not angry with Frank, and when he came to talk to her through the closed door, she forgave him.” Whew! Glad that’s settled! Now who wants dinner?

Ready for more ludicrousness? Turn to The Secret of Amityville, which serves as a prequel to explain the Native American angle. Initially set in 1717 at outfits like The Pig and Whistle, it’s a tale of lords, Scots, buccaneers and wasted ink. If he couldn’t write a modern-day story, what made him think he could do historical?

The only thing remotely scary about this anthology? I paid for it. –Rod Lott

Get them at Amazon.

*Anson’s word, not mine.

Reading Material: Short Ends 10/26/19

Let’s get something straight: The Rotten Tomatoes website is a tool of evil. And yet, its editors sure have put together one helluva fun book in Rotten Movies We Love: Cult Classics, Underrated Gems, and Films So Bad They’re Good. Its cover is a good place to start this discussion, too, because what’s wrong with Step Brothers? Not one damn thing, and that’s entirely the point. See, for the most part, this Running Press release is not a nose-thumbing, Medved-style coal-raker, but an affection-overflowing celebration of movies the public embraced, even if critics failed to. Therefore, across all genres, prep for spirited defenses of members of the maligned, such as Dr. Giggles, MacGruber, Event Horizon, San Andreas and Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla, the latter from guest scribe Leonard Maltin. An absolute pleasure to read, it’s a keeper worth revisiting. More ’maters, please.

After penning a bestselling book about basketball (and other things), Shea Serrano follows it up with the similarly structured Movies (and Other Things). Published by Twelve, the colorful hardback finds Serrano posing 30 geekily theoretical questions (“Who gets it the worst in Kill Bill?”), each of which he answers in a sly, intelligent, knows-his-shit way, supplemented by charts, graphs and/or Arturo Torres illustrations. I only wished I were more willing to take part in the conversation. It’s not unlike Ryan Britt’s Luke Skywalker Can’t Read, but each essay tends to wear out its welcome before Serrano reaches his conclusion. With discussions of Denzel Washington, Booksmart, Kevin Costner, Selena, movie dogs, the Marvel Cinematic Universe and so much more, this book is destined to be beloved; I fully admit knowing my lukewarm response resides in the minority.

While 1939 and 1999 are often bandied about as the best years for movies, Brian Hannan makes the case for 1969 marking cowboy cinema’s sweet spot, in The Gunslingers of ’69: Western Movies’ Greatest Year. It’s hard to argue against that when you consider the staggering amount of masterpieces made, including The Wild Bunch, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and Once Upon a Time in the West. And there are 40 more Westerns where those came from (even the X-rated), with Hannan offering an inviting and well-balanced mix of history and criticism as he covers each film in a broad overview of what was perhaps the genre’s most transformative time: when revisionism hopped in the saddle. If you enjoy classic Westerns, this comes recommended, as does Hannan’s The Making of The Magnificent Seven (also published by McFarland & Company) from a few years ago.

Following similar genre-celebratory collections on vampires, zombies, ghosts, adventurers and pulp heroes (all from Vintage Crime’s Black Lizard line), anthologist extraordinaire Otto Penzler rounds up more than 60 pieces of short fiction for The Big Book of Reel Murders: Stories That Inspired Great Crime Films. Simply put, this hefty trade paperback is just that, with Ian Fleming’s “A View to a Kill,” Agatha Christie’s “The Witness for the Prosecution,” Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game,” Daphne du Maurier’s “Don’t Look Now,” Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Murders in the Rue Morgue.” Straddling the genres of mystery, thrillers, horror and more, Reel Murders also showcases Arthur Conan Doyle, Dashiell Hammett, Dennis Lehane, Edgar Wallace, Jack Finney, Joyce Carol Oates, Robert Louis Stevenson — not a single one to sneeze at. Whether you like to read source material of films you’ve seen or crime fiction in general, this bang-for-your-buck collection should be right up your shadow-strewn alley. —Rod Lott

Get them at Amazon.

Reading Material: Short Ends 7/8/19

In a summer that has seen several sequels tank, at least one doesn’t disappoint: Make My Day: Movie Culture in the Age of Reagan, preeminent film critic J. Hoberman’s trilogy-capper. As An Army of Phantoms and The Dream Life considered American cinema in the Cold War and the 1960s, respectively, Make My Day looks to the late 1970s and the whole of the 1980s; as in those works, also from The New Press, American cinema is also considered through the lens of the era’s politics, and how one informed or reflected the other. With Ronald Reagan as movie star-cum-POTUS, Hoberman certainly has a wealth of material to parse, most notably in the “warnography” of Rambo: First Blood Part II, Top Gun, Iron Eagle and, to a lesser degree, WarGames. It’s not all jets and jocks, either, with everything from the narrative quilt of Nashville to the science-fried comedy of Ghostbusters and basically everything Steven Spielberg Midas-touched. The tour is fascinating, politically charged (yet fact-based) and even thrilling. An overuse of the prefix “crypto-” and a couple of names getting botched (as Jon Voigt, Gary Marshall and Christian Glover) do nothing to diminish its excellence.

Serious question: Does Roberto Curti ever sleep? The Italian film historian has been averaging two research-heavy books a year, with his latest being Italian Gothic Horror Films, 1980-1989. Those already familiar with Curti will know this is the third in the IGHF series, which began in 2015 (1957-1969) and continued in 2017 (1970-1979), all published by McFarland & Company. The VHS-weaned generation may have been waiting on this one all along, given that the video-store era coincided with the gore-heavy auteurist period of Dario Argento, Lucio Fulci, Lamberto Bava and others, who made some of their best work in this fertile period. Again going chronologically, Curti examines each notable title, with critical and historical appreciations that can run for multiple pages, if merited (the above men among those). If there’s a fly in this soup, it’s that Curti refers to films primarily by their Italian titles, which can get tricky if you’re not paying attention, assuming you’re also not bilingual. Molto bene!

Portable Press’ Strange Hollywood is not unlike an entry in the assumedly immortal Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader series: a chunky little book to absorb a page or two at a time, most likely during dumps, with contents only slightly less temporary. Thus, lists make up much of the 400-plus pages, from movie stars’ final roles and original titles of hit pictures to fun facts about The Muppets and memorable quips from TV’s Hollywood Squares. Occasionally, there’s even an anecdote worth your time, such as why Tommy Lee Jones couldn’t stand working with Jim Carrey on Batman Forever, resulting in the former telling the latter, “I cannot sanction your buffoonery.” All in all, the book is a novelty that might work as a stocking stuffer. —Rod Lott

Get them at Amazon.

The Golden Age of Disaster Cinema: A Guide to the Films, 1950-1979

With Glenn Kay and Michael Rose’s wonderful Disaster Movies: The Ultimate Guide long out of print, the field has been open for a title to swoop in as a no-brainer purchase for those interested in navigating the oft-campy subgenre. I’m afraid Nik Havert’s bid, however, isn’t it.

As hinted by the title, The Golden Age of Disaster Cinema: A Guide to the Films, 1950-1979, his definition of the subject is perhaps too malleable, stretched to include alien invasions produced by George Pal and ecological-revenge fantasies, rather than sticking to the perils of Irwin Allen and others who either influenced or Xeroxed the projects of his reign.

Year by year, movie by movie, Havert ticks through offerings from screens big and small, but other than the occasional emailed remembrance by someone who worked on the film, his articles follow an unfortunate formula: brief remarks of innocuous criticism preceded by several paragraphs of beat-by-beat story synopsis, each maddeningly ending with a same-Bat-time/same-Bat-channel question as repetitive as it is needless. For example:
• “Will any of them make it out alive?” (Airport ’77)
• “Can any of them escape, and will the infection spread if they do?” (The Crazies)
• “Who will survive the wall of water rushing for Brownsville, and will the town ever be the same?” (Flood)
• “Will they make it, and will anyone else survive the aftermath?” (Avalanche)
• “Will either shelter be strong enough to hold off the attacks, and what awaits the survivors further down the mountain if they make it through the night?” (Day of the Animals)

While Havert is obviously passionate about disaster cinema, he is unable to convey that in a way that engages the reader, and calls too many films “lost” that are not (like This Is a Hijack). On the plus side, the McFarland & Company paperback is thorough, packed with obscurities — where else will one learn of Flug in Gefhar? —Rod Lott

Get it at Amazon.