The Stepford Wives (2004)

From 1975, the original film adaptation of The Stepford Wives was a feminist horror film, with an intriguing story, palatable suspense and a jolt of an ending. The 2004 remake by Frank Oz (Little Shop of Horrors), however, is allegedly a comedy — a broad, Broadway-camp goof shot with the same color palette as a bag of Skittles, just as disposable and with about as much nutritional value.

Katherine Ross’ sympathetic photographer Joanna has morphed into Nicole Kidman’s bitchy and cutthroat TV network executive, whose five-year reign at the top comes to an immediate end when an embittered participant from one of her reality shows tries to kill her. Fearing bad press, the net lets her go. One nervous breakdown later, Joanna and husband (Matthew Broderick, about as convincing as Kidman’s significant other as Tom Cruise was) uproot their two rarely seen kids and move to the gated town of Stepford, Conn.

The suburb is quiet, the homes are magnificent and the wives are robotic, subservient hotties in floral dresses from the ‘50s. A snooping Joanna — along with her nosy pal Bette Midler and, because In & Out‘s Paul Rudnick wrote the script, a gay man (Roger Bart, Hostel: Part II) — discovers that the Stepford Men’s Club, headed by Christopher Walken, is behind the transformation of the city’s women into large-breasted, no-questions-asked automatons.

The movie itself is about as brainless. There are a few good one-liners, but the tone is all wrong, the editing awkward and the whole production looks cheap and rushed. I felt not like I was watching a Stepford remake, but rather a MADtv parody. And, MADtv being what it is, not a particularly good one. Script problems aside, much of the blame has to fall on Kidman. She’s no comedienne. Hell, she’s hardly even a “she,” looking like death in a dress. She’s not supposed to be pretty early in the film, but even following her Stepford makeover, the woman looks unhealthy, emaciated and decidedly un-Stepford-sexy.

All in all, this glorified sitcom is a miscast failure. It’s not quite a train wreck, although it is an insult to Ira Levin’s still-great 1972 novel. Stepford Wives, I want a divorce — no, wait: an annulment. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

The Boogens (1981)

Three decades passed between the 10-year-old me being intrigued by the TV ads for The Boogens and actually being able to see the film. I wasn’t disappointed, because the little horror film is pretty solid. I should have expected as much, considering how many images from those 30-second commercials never left my mind. They were exactly as I remembered them.

The opening credits rely the backstory through vintage newspaper front pages: A small town in the Colorado Rockies briefly was a pay-dirt place for mining silver … until the “attacks” happened, and the mines were closed. Years later, they’re reopened, and the dynamite unleashes the Boogens — creatures that look like the evil spawn of a turtle and a giant spider, with tentacles spiked at the end for maximum neck-slashing action.

Although largely unseen until the picture’s end, the monsters take shelter in the basement of a house into which two young, virile hired hands (an extra-randy Jeff Harlan and Xanadu‘s Fred McCarren) move. Girlfriend Anne-Marie Martin (TV’s Sledge Hammer) and her pal Rebecca Balding (Silent Scream) come to visit, bringing along a yappy little dog that’s actually a darn good actor, as far as animals go. That they won’t all last until the end is a given, but how and in what order?

Despite its goofy, ooga-booga title — never spoken by any of the characters — the film takes itself at just the right level of seriousness; it’s not the piece of quick-buck schlock I feared it might be. Director James L. Conway (Hangar 18) tells the story earnestly, making it a welcome respite from the era’s slasher craze. Smarter than you’d think and lagging only in the middle, The Boogens recalls the creature features of yore — perhaps not with class, but definitely with ingenuity that belies its low budget. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

Nikkatsu Roman Porno Trailer Collection (2010)

From 1971 to 1988, the Japanese studio Nikkatsu famously cranked out more than a thousand sexploitation films so a horny populace could, y’know, crank ’em out. The riotous Nikkatsu Roman Porno Trailer Collection offers the “coming” attractions for 38 of them, giving you a taste of not only an hour’s worth of Nikkatsu’s arty, yet over-the-top output, but of how insanely fucked-up the country’s culture can be. How else to explain such ludicrously lurid titles as I Love It From Behind!, Painful Bliss! A Surprise Twist, Nurse Diary: Mischievous Fingers and Nympho Diver: G-String Festival?

Most of the trailers look similar to the others, with men violating women in acts of (I assume) simulated sex, but under the Japanese censors’ fairly stringent rules of verboten visuals, i.e. genitals and penetration. Therefore, everything else is amped up to fill the gap, so to speak, from dialogue (“How do you rape? Try it on me? Let’s see you try! Fill me with your pistil!” per Female Teacher Hunting) and scenarios (orgasmic Olympic hopefuls of Female Gymnastics Instructor: Jump and Straddle) to those say-it-all/do-it-all titles (Nurses’ Dormitory: Assy Fingers, anyone?) and their taglines to match.

Ah, yes, the taglines. Consider:
• “A house of pleasure wreathed in the fragrance of semen.” (Sex Hunter)
• “The woman’s flame awaits the man’s sap with her moistened lips trembling.” (Zoom Up: Beaver Book Girl)
• “Sexy women should make love while they’re still hot!” (She Cat)
• “Tear it apart! Punch them hard!” (Sex Hunter: Wet Target)
• “Give it all to fuck ‘n’ roll!” (Oh! Women: Dirty Songs)
• “Between the legs of island girls can be found awabi clams, akagai clams, sea urchins, and sea slugs … even the first catch of the season goes into that moist place.” (Pearl Divers: Tight Shellfish)

If I already didn’t eat seafood, that last one would do it.

The so-called “romantic pornography” of “Roman Pornos” run the genre gamut, offering serious melodrama (Affair in the Early Afternoon: Kyoto Tapestry), horror (Zoom In: Rape Apartments), superhero comedy (Sex Fiend), historical costume pageantry (Confidential Report: Prostitute Torture Hell), crime thrillers (Race Across the Drenched Wasteland), movie spoofs (New Company Girls: 9 to 5) and the how-to instructional (Rape Me! Sexual Assault in a Hotel Room) … well, instructional if you need to know how to make an impromptu beer-bottle douche. Soccer moms, before you get all holier than thou, be sure to stick a bookmark in your copy of Fifty Shades of Grey first, please. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Synapse Films.

Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed (2004)

Yes, Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed may be better than its predecessor, but that’s like saying leukemia is better than cancer. It’s still wretched, painful viewing.

The whole Mystery Inc. gang is back — Fred (Freddie Prinze Jr.) Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby (millions of dollars worth of CGI). At the film’s open, they’re attending a grand opening of a Coolsville Museum exhibit of monster costumes of villains they’ve unmasked in the past. Then a bad guy steals the costumes and makes real monsters out of them. Then the real monsters attack the city. Then the Mystery Inc. gang stops them. And then tubby American Idol winner Ruben Studdard shows up to sing an Earth, Wind & Fire song while the cast does an embarrassingly choreographed, career-killing dance number.

Oh, you can add Seth Green as a museum curator, Alicia Silverstone as a nosy reporter and Peter Boyle as a senile old man, but you’re not fooling me: This is the same movie. Granted, there are two big fart gags rather than just one this time around, but still, it’s the same crap all over again: zero story, zero laughs and all special effects. Lord, why did I have kids?

The only thing that makes this marginally cooler — and you should read “marginally” as if it were bold, underlined and in red — is that the monsters are the same from the Hanna-Barbera cartoon series, so there’s a slight kick of nostalgia. It wears off pretty quickly, however, making way for that migraine. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

The Ruins (2008)

Twice a year, you’re supposed to spread pre-emergent fertilizer on your lawn to prevent weeds from ever popping up. Someone should have done the same to The Ruins, a terrible killer-vines horror flick based upon Scott Smith’s not-at-all-terrible 2006 novel of the same name.

Two couples of college kids vacationing in Mexico meet a charismatic German guy who needs help finding his brother, from whom he’s heard no word since venturing out on a trip to check out some ancient ruins in the nearby jungle. Somehow, this seems like a viable alternative to another day of drinking and doing it, so our quartet of all-American students agrees to help the complete stranger out.

Bad move. No sooner do they arrive on the site — which looks like a stair-step stone temple — than locals speaking a foreign tongue shoot one of their new friend’s friends, via an arrow to the heart and a bullet through the nose. This drives our imperiled heroes and heroines to the top of the site, where they’re imprisoned by the growing armed throng below. Then there’s the matter of the ruins’ plant life: It’s, like, alive, dude. And it eats people by burrowing into their skin and moving around. With precious little food or water and seemingly no hope to get through the human gauntlet below, the collegians’ future doesn’t look so rosy.

It’s hard to fathom why The Ruins is as bad as it is, since Smith (A Simple Plan) is also responsible for the screenplay. It’s simply boring, which is weird, because what played out as gripping over 336 pages seems an absolutely tedious uphill climb at just 93 minutes. Part of the reason may be we’re given no insight into who the characters are, so we don’t really care about what happens to them. We know they like to pound back the booze, and that’s about it; they’re ciphers.

If anything, the movie deserves a bravery badge for not diluting the shock moments of the novel — most notably, an impromptu double amputation in grisly detail — but it chickens out of presenting the book’s chilling ending, going for one of those insipid Hollywood “gotcha” moments — the cinematic equivalent to a middle finger hoisted toward the audience. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

Random Genre & Cult Movie Reviews