House of Horrors (1946) – Reviews

During the 1940s Universal Pictures decided to launch a new series of low-budget films featuring actor Rondo Hatton as “The Creeper” and the best of those films would be House of Horrors. Produced by Ben Pivar and directed by Jean Yarbrough, this film starred the original “Monster Without Make-up” as The Creeper!

Set in the dark and mysterious atmosphere of 1940s New York City, House of Horrors follows the story of a struggling sculptor named Marcel De Lange (Martin Kosleck) who after losing a rich patron due to an unscrupulous art critic named F. Holmes Harmon (Alan Napier), a man who holds significant influence over the city’s art scene and delights in spewing his cruel vitriol in print. This is the last straw poor Marcel who decides to end his life by jumping into the East River, but in a weird twist of fate, his suicide is interrupted by the discovery of a nearly drowned disfigured man. This individual turns out to be the notorious serial killer known as The Creeper (Rondo Hatton) but instead of informing the police, he decides to not only make him the subject of his next work of art but to also use him to murder those critics who have ridiculed him.

 

“I am the world’s first fully functioning homicidal artist.”

Also on the art scene is Joan Medford (Virginia Grey), an art critic herself but one who actually likes Marcel, unfortunately not as much as she likes hunky commercial artist Steven Morrow (Robert Lowery) who becomes suspect number one when Harmon is found murdered and their well documented public altercation at an uptown art gallery is brought to the attention of the police. What follows is pretty much your standard police procedural, with Homicide Lieutenant Larry Brooks (Bill Goodwin) popping in to interrogate our protagonists in-between murders and a few back-breaking killings by The Creeper, with the movie eventually concluding in a final confrontation between our oblivious heroine, the lunatic artist and his murdering associate.

 

“You can’t kill me, I have a contract for three more pictures.”

Stray Observations:

• Despite being called House of Horrors this movie takes place within a series of New York City apartments and flats, not a house to be seen. Clearly, the studio was trying to lump this entry in with such films as House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula.
• Artists turning into crazed murderers is a bit of a reoccurring theme in horror films, back in 1933 we had wax museum sculptor Lionel Atwill murdering models for his work in The Mystery of the Wax Museum.
• The deputy coroner has the magical ability to determine if a spine has been snapped just by looking at the victim while they’re still laying where he fell.
• Rondo Hatton’s The Creeper would inspire a famous villain in the original run of Scooby-Doo, Where Are You! In the episode “Jeepers, it’s the Creeper.”
• Alan Napier would later earn greater fame playing Alfred in the Adam West Batman series, where he would encounter even more bizarre-looking villains.

 

“Holy homicide, Batman!”

Rondo Hatton’s portrayal of The Creeper is without a doubt the best part of this movie, Hatton’s physical appearance, which was caused by a rare medical condition known as acromegaly, lends an unsettling authenticity to his characters and this adds to the terror he creates. His imposing presence and the subtleties of his performance make him a somewhat sympathetic villain – that is when he’s not murdering women for screaming at the mere sight of him – and this he makes a rather unique in the annals of Universal Horror. Along with the murderous Creeper we aslo have Martin Kosleck delivering a solid performance as a bitter and insane artist, adding another touch of villainy to this narrative. As much as The Creeper is a murdering monster it’s the unsettling creepiness of Marcel that unnerved me, at least more than the lumbering serial killer who is basically a tool of destruction and only gets agency of his own when Marcel finally gets his karmic comeuppance.

 

Who knew having a serial killer for a roommate could end badly?

While House of Horrors is considered primarily a horror film it also explores deeper themes such as beauty, acceptance and the lengths one may go to achieve recognition in the art world. To quote Jack Nicholson “I make art until someone dies.” The film does a decent job delving into the psychological motivations of its characters, showcasing the dark consequences of society’s rejection and the potential darkness that lies within every individual. Despite it being considered one of the Universal Horror Movies this entry is clearly more a crime drama than it is a horror picture and Rondo Hatton’s Creeper could easily be compared to the brute Moose Malloy from the Chandler classic Farewell, My Lovely. It also has a very Film Noire look to it that was expertly created by cinematographer Maury Gertsman and along with Hatton’s performance is one the best parts of this film.

 

“Which one of you guys is Dashiell Hammett?”

In conclusion, House of Horrors is a compelling and atmospheric horror film that may not be as well remembered as other Universal films, but with its excellent performances, haunting visuals and thought-provoking themes, it remains a notable entry in the genre. Fans of classic horror movies will appreciate its chilling atmosphere and the appearance of the unforgettable Rondo Hatton is an added bonus. If you enjoy suspenseful tales that explore the darker side of humanity, one that also has a dash of Film Noire, then this film is definitely worth tracking down.

The Body Snatcher (1945) – Review

Working for RKO, producer Val Lewton brought to screen some startling moments of cinematic horror with such offerings as Cat People and I Walked with a Zombie to his credit, but in the case of The Body Snatcher, he and director Robert Wise were given the keys to the horror kingdom with Boris Karloff in the titular role of this horror classic.

Based on an 1884 short story by Robert Louis Steven, The Body Snatcher is set in 19th-century Edinburgh and revolves around the sinister doings of cabman John Gray (Boris Karloff) and Dr. Wolfe MacFarlane (Henry Daniell), who runs an anatomy school. The two men are driven by greed and desperation as they engage in the grim practice of grave robbing to provide bodies for medical experiments, if only grave robbing was the worst of their crimes. What makes The Body Snatcher truly memorable is the palpable atmosphere of dread that permeates every scene and keeps you nailed to your seat. Wise’s adept direction and the moody cinematography by Robert De Grasse creates a foreboding sense of unease that is required for this sort of outing to work and its done expertly here. The use of shadows and dimly lit sets adds a layer of intensity, transporting us into the dark and grim world of 19th-century Edinburgh.

 

“Just put him next to Lon Chaney Jr.”

The film’s central conflict arises when young medical student Donald Fettes (Russell Wade) discovers the truth behind the fresh cadavers supplied by Gray and MacFarlane and its this revelation that sets off a series of spine-chilling events, culminating in a gripping moral dilemma that tests the characters’ humanity. Things get morally complicated when they need a new body for experimentation, MacFarlane is reluctant to operate on a sweet little paralyzed girl without a new spinal cord to study, so Fettes goes off on his own to ask Gray to procure a body as soon as possible. Needless to say, Gray doesn’t bother stalking the local graveyard, he simply goes out and murders a local street singer and quickly brings her to Fettes. The tension builds relentlessly as the characters become entangled in a nightmarish dance of guilt and desperation, and as the plot unfolds, MacFarlane finds himself trapped in a web of deceit and blackmail spun by the sinister Gray.

 

Who could have guessed this guy wasn’t on the up and up?

Stray Observations:

• While based on a fictional short story, author Robert Louis Stevenson took the idea from actual events that occurred in 19th-century England and Scotland, particularly those of grave robbers Burke and Hare.
• How evil is Boris Karloff in this film? Well, he clubs to death a small dog that was guarding the grave of its young master. That’s pretty evil in my book.
• When you accuse someone of murder and they ask you if you’ve told anyone else, for Heaven’s sake say yes!
• As typical of most Hollywood films of this era, while the story takes place in Edinburgh, only one person in the entire movie has a Scottish accent.
• This film featured the 8th and last on-screen teaming of Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi.

 

Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi (1934-1939)

With this performance in The Body Snatcher, Boris Karloff proves once again what a legend he is as his performance is nothing short of exceptional, his imposing presence and eerie charisma makes him the perfect embodiment of malevolence. Adding to that great performance is that of Henry Daniell whose portrayal of Dr. MacFarlane adds depth and complexity to the movie as his internal struggle between his noble profession and the unholy alliance with Gray makes him a fascinating character to watch. As if their dark pact isn’t bad enough we also see a tragic relationship between MacFarlane and his housekeeper Meg Camden (Edith Atwater) who is actually MacFarlane’s wife but their marriage has been kept secret to keep his illustrious station untainted by being married to a woman of a lower class. Rounding out the cast of characters is Joseph the school’s custodian (Bela Lugosi) who makes the mistake of trying to blackmail a cold-blooded killer, adding layers of intrigue to the narrative.

 

“I clearly didn’t think things through.”

With this film, Robert Wise is able to masterfully explores themes of morality, greed, and the fine line between science and the supernatural. It questions the ethics of medical practices during the time, delving into the consequences of tampering with the natural order of life and death. As the film unfolds, it becomes apparent that the true horror lies not in the supernatural elements but in the darkness lurking within human hearts, and despite its age, The Body Snatcher retains its ability to captivate modern audiences. Its atmospheric horror, well-crafted plot, and outstanding performances continue to be an inspiration for many filmmakers in the genre. Whether you are a fan of classic horror or just seeking a thought-provoking and eerie tale, this film is a must-watch. The film’s climax is a spine-chilling sequence that will haunt your thoughts long after the credits roll as the film truly defies expectations, avoiding simplistic resolutions and instead delving into the darkest corners of the human psyche.

 

Check your morals at the door.

In conclusion, The Body Snatcher remains a timeless horror gem. Its powerful storytelling, haunting visuals, and remarkable performances create an unforgettable cinematic experience. So, if you dare to step into the shadows of 19th-century Edinburgh and confront the malevolence that lies beneath, this is the film to watch. But be warned, for once you enter this macabre world, you may find yourself haunted long after the credits roll.

Velma Season: 2 (2024) – Review

With all the streaming services that currently flood the market getting a second season is almost a miracle, especially with ratings and popularity harder to track, but in 2023 HBO Max released their adult-aimed Velma and it was critically reviled and panned by almost everyone, especially Scooby-Doo fans, yet it somehow got a second season, how was this possible?

There are movies and television shows out there that people love for just how bad they are, the phrase “So bad they’re good” is almost a badge of honour among these projects, but “Hate Watching” is a little different as this is for anti-fans who derive pleasure from a piece of media that is rooted in its perceived shortcomings. But is “Hate Watching” the reason for its return? Probably not, even though HBO Max’s Velma season one had one of the lowest scores on IMDB – currently sitting at 1.6 – it is typical for animated shows to get a two-season contract as they are expensive and time-consuming. So despite the poor reviews and loud vitriolic outbursts from most viewers, season two was going to happen whether fans liked it or not. Now, the big question is “Did the producers take any of that negative feedback into consideration when they went into production for season two?”

 

Or is that hope as dead as Sheriff Cogburn?

Season two picks up three weeks after the events of season one, which ended with the murder of Sheriff Cogburn (Stephen Root) and now picks up with Velma (Mindy Kaling) and Daphne (Constance Wu) stumbling across his corpse while walking through the woods. Velma immediately suspects the killer to be Victoria Jones (Cherry Jones), Fred’s mother who was last season’s killer and died at the hands of Norville (Sam Richardson) – albeit accidentally – but Velma is sure that she is somehow alive and out for revenge. Meanwhile, Fred (Glen Howerton) has not only started his own mystery-solving business “Fred Jones Spooky Stuff Hunter” he’s also found religion and wants to prove that his mom was not the killer but, instead, was possessed by the ghost of Norville’s grandmother. Then there is the problem of Shaggy having massive panic attacks over accidentally killing Fred’s mother, which causes him crippling hallucinations.

 

“I’ll swallow your soul!”

Next, we have the startling revelation that Daphne’s parents, Donna (Jane Lynch) and Linda Blake (Wanda Sykes), are campaigning for the position of co-sheriff and have been covering up the fact that Sheriff Cogburn was murdered weeks before his body was found in the woods. Could they have murdered him for his job? Or could it be Velma’s favourite teacher Mr. S (Ed Weeks) who has the hots for Velma’s mom (Sarayu Blu) and is obsessed with the works of Edna Perdue (Vanessa Williams), Shaggy’s grandmother, whose work in the 1970s military program “SCOOBI” (Special COvert Operations Brain Initiative), where soldiers’ brains were to be placed in the bodies of meddling kids, led to the serial killing and brain harvesting of the previous season? Oh wait, he’s just been brutally murdered, guess that puts him in the clear. While the mystery formula doesn’t deviate too much from what we got in season one as it basically continues plot elements, what does change is the relationship dynamics in our little group.

 

Is there trouble in lesbian paradise?

Daphne and Velma had become an item by the end of season one, with poor simping Norville left out in the cold, but this budding relationship doesn’t get much of a honeymoon period as Daphne’s statement that they are “soulmates” immediately sends Velma into a “logic rage” as she points out there is no scientific basis for the existence of souls, so the idea of soulmates is ridiculous. And why would such an innocuous comment, one that even the likes Neil DeGrasse Tyson could hardly get upset about, bother Velma? The answer is easy, lazy writing. The people behind this show took a look at the original cartoon and saw Velma as the group’s resident skeptic – who was the first to believe there must be a logical explanation behind supposedly supernatural events – and then decided this means Velma is some kind of “Science Nazi” and that anything which cannot be empirically proven does not exist, but she goes further than that, telling Daphne that anyone who believes in such things is stupid. And it’s not like Daphne is a Flat-Earther she simply has romantic notions about love, something sweet and completely harmless, but Velma as Captain Science Buzzkill has to piss all over such silly notions.

 

“Living brains in jars I can accept, but love is not quantifiable.”

This conflict reaches a new level when Goth girl Amber (Sara Ramirez) introduces Daphne to Wiccan beliefs which sends Velma over the edge resulting in Daphne and Amber pairing off to create some more relationship drama, because if we can’t have a good Scooby-Doo mystery we may as well have lame high school drama. And this leads to the key problem with this show – which already has so many problems – is that it’s hard for us to become emotionally invested in any of these characters because they are so damn unlikable. The fact that a serial killer running around murdering people and ripping off their dicks is treated as nothing more than a distraction is a fundamental misstep that this show never recovers from, it is a failure of mystery writing 101. The only interesting development in this season is the three girls, who ended up as brains in jars in the previous season, have continued to go to class and one of them even falls in love with Norville.

 

“We’ve decided to go off and have our own mysteries.”

Stray Observations:

• Goth Girl Amber is the daughter of Thorn from the Hex Girls, who has retired from music to open an occult book store. I guess they are completely doing away with any kind of continuity or timeline from the other Scooby-Doo shows.
• Last season Velma suffered crippling guilt-based hallucinations over the disappearance of her mother, now we have Norville dealing with the same affliction over his killing of Fred’s mom. That she turns out to be a ghost does not stop this element from feeling tired and lazy.
• Fred telling Velma “Real faith is knowing something’s true when it’s verifiably false” is one of the few nice moments of pointed societal awareness that this show sneaks in.
• We get a whole subplot about Norville’s dad forcing him to take marijuana to help him with his guilt complex, not only is this from a parent but a school employee and is one of the dumbest of dumb elements in this show.
• The kids are forced to take detention in the school library in a Breakfast Club fashion but the writers attempt to take this homage/rip-off into meta-commentary territory with the characters being aware of the nostalgia bait. It doesn’t work.
• This series continues to drop in “Hey do you remember that” moments by tossing in updated versions of characters like Dick Dastardly from Wacky Races.

 

“I’m edgy and dark which means I’m cool…right?”

As with the first season Velma, this second instalment continues still fail at feeling like a Scooby-Doo cartoon, and the edgy elements remains overused clichéd remain unfunny, and while some of the more egregious aspects that made season one so awful are toned down here it still a far cry from the mystery solving gang we all know and love. On the plus side, while Velma is still a narcissistic asshat Fred is given an interesting character arc where he goes on a journey to discover that “Maybe my mother was an awful person and I don’t have to be” and his exploration of religion provides a few genuine laughs. Then there is the subplot of Norville falling in love with one of the brains in jars, which began somewhat interesting, with it exploring the obvious theme of “loving someone for the mind and not their body” but then it fell victim to self-sabotaged at the end so he could remain alone and humiliated. Do you get the impression that the writers of this show don’t actually like these characters? But what about the mystery itself? Who is responsible for a series of brutal and dick-removing murders? Spoiler Alert, it’s fucking Scrappy-Doo. And didn’t we already do this in the first live-action movie?

 

“It’s not my fault, the writers made me this way.”

The Scooby-Doo formula has always been a fairly basic one; the Scooby gang would arrive on the scene, look for clues and uncover a bunch of suspects until eventually pulling off a mask to reveal it was “Old man Smithers!” the entire time. That isn’t quite the case here. As this show has ten episodes to fill and only one mystery there are going to be a lot of subplots – most of which won’t go anywhere – but the biggest problem here is that the gang doesn’t seem to be doing much in the solving mystery area, they just run from one chaotic scene to the next and only uncovering information after it’s pretty much fallen in their collective laps. The critically praised series Mystery Incorporated also had an over-arcing plot but it also had stand-alone mysteries as well, stuff for the gang to solve along the way before the reveal of the season’s Big Bad. Not so much here, season two of Velma doesn’t just have one villain, instead, there are a half-dozen characters involved in a vast cover-up conspiracy.  To say the plot was more complicated than it needed to be would be a vast understatement.

 

“Unmask me at your peril, it will only piss you off.”

Aside from frivolous subplots and a convoluted collection of “villains” we also have to suffer a series of heavy-handed “messaging” such as pointing out the evils of social media, as if dozens of shows haven’t already covered this topic and a lot better. Velma season two’s shallow attempts at social commentary brings nothing new to the subject matter and we get nothing but empty diatribes by two-dimensional characters. We get such startling revelations that being pretty doesn’t necessarily make your life easier and “Maybe you should try and walk a mile in my shoes” which this show illustrates via brain swapping, so I give them points for that, despite this already having become a clichéd topic at this point. That said, the animators on this show do some nice work as the overall animation quality is quite good, if only as much work had been put into screenwriting as is found in the art direction, then maybe we good have had at least a halfway decent show. Sadly, that was not to be.

 

“How’d it get burned? How’d it get burned?”

Overall, season two of Velma is another example of a show trying to be dark and meta while stuffing gore and some kind of social commentary into the proceedings and then failing miserably to make any of it work. It’s not funny, it’s not edgy and worst of all it’s not Scooby-Doo. That said, I will say this is a slight improvement over the first season – Velma isn’t such a hateful bitch – and the art direction while not on par with Mystery Incorporated still delivers some nice visuals. It should also be noted that HBO Max dumped all of season two episodes at once, unlike season one’s once-a-week formula, which I’m fairly certain means they are cutting their losses and hoping everyone soon forgets this show ever existed. They can count me in that group as well.

Cellar Dweller (1988) – Review

While Charles Band was notorious for churning out low-budget horror flicks, with varying levels of success, but like Roger Corman he tended to give those loyal to him a shot at exploring different careers and so he gave special make-up effects artist John Carl Buechler a chance to direct a film of his own.  Sadly, two years after his directorial debut with the disastrous film Troll he proves with Cellar Dweller that a talent for creating special effects does not necessarily translate to the skills needed to helm a movie.

The plot of Cellar Dweller is as simple as it is nonsensical, we get an opening prologue where popular comic book artist Colin Childress (Jeffrey Combs) unwittingly calls forth a demonic power – drawing inspiration from a book that looks like the Necronomicon is bound to result in that sort of thing – the beast he conjures feeds on artistic merit, which means this film’s director should be safe, and it devours a beautiful woman before Colin can dispatch the creature by setting fire to the drawings depicting the beast, unfortunately, the fire also consumes Childress as well and he later considered a murderer who ended his own life. My only question is “Why was Childress cos-playing as Herbert West?”

 

If guilty of anything, this film wasted Jeffrey Combs.

We fast forward thirty years and find that Childress’s home has now become a colony for artists and the plot of the film kicks into gear with the arrival of our protagonist, Whitney Taylor (Debrah Mullowney) a comic book artist.  She is obsessed with Childress’s story, which causes a bit of a stir because the school’s headmistress, Mrs. Briggs (Yvonne De Carlo), considers comic book art to be low brow and not worthy of being considered true art. This is odd when you factor in the other pupils at this school, there is Phillip Lemley (Brian Robbins) who produces abstract art that wouldn’t pass muster in a kindergarten class – he is also this film’s supposed love interest – and next there is Lisa (Miranda Wilson) who is a performance artist, which brings the added question of “What kind of art school has but a handful of students and that broad of the curriculum?” Then there is Norman Meshelski (Vince Edwards) a private eye who wants to be the next Raymond Chandler, who gains inspiration by bursting into rooms to act out various scenes, and once again I must ask “What kind of art school provides lessons in writing crime fiction?”

 

“Whitney, is this an art colony or some kind of cult?”

Whitney is told that no one is allowed into the cellar, where Childress worked and met his untimely end, but before you can say “Bluebeard” she’s poking around the dust and cobwebs of her idol’s old studio and discovers the mystical tome that brought forth the demon/vampire/werewolf thing that ended Childress’s life. Clearly, this is not drama enough for a movie clocking in at 77-minutes so one of the other students, Amanda (Pamela Bellwood), is an old college rival of Whitney’s who tortured her mercilessly during their academic days.  She teams up with Mrs. Briggs to get rid of Whitney but that just moves her up the list to that of first victim. What follows is Whitney drawing the creature killing one of the other pupils, – whether her drawings create them or if there are other demonic forces at play is never made clear – and then the demon brutally attacks and devours them. And that pretty much sums up the plot of Cellar Dweller, and it’s just a mater of “Can Whitney and her pal Philip figure out what’s going on in time for Spring Break?” and  “Will the Comics Code Authority condemn this school on grounds of malpractice?” and most importantly “Would anyone sit through this movie a second time?”

 

A cool monster and gratuitous nudity will only get you so far.

Stray Observations:

• We get a shaky-cam POV tracking shot up to and through a cabin door and I have to assume the director is a fan of Sam Rami and this is an homage and not a rip-off of Evil Dead.
• I would absolutely enrol in an art school run by Lily Munster and would only hope that her husband Herman would drop by with Cousin Marilyn.
• Whitney has the horror poster for the Stuart Gordon film The Re-Animator in her dorm room, which prominently features actor Jeffrey Coombs, which I find oddly meta in this instance.
• Philip comments “Aren’t you a little old for comics, Whitney?” which is not only moronic because comic books by this point in time were intended for all ages, but she is a comic book artist and not just a reader.
• Whitney finds the cellar dusty and full of cobwebs but as we saw the room engulfed in flames during the prologue I’m not sure how any of the furniture or art survived. Do the dark forces also work as firemen and furniture restorers?
• The demon rips people apart and devours them in a rather messy fashion yet when someone later enters the room there is no corpse or any evidence that anything untoward happened. Do the dark forces also provide crime scene cleaning services?

 

No sense in losing your head over this film’s logical issues.

One of the film’s major drawbacks is its lack of character development as the entire cast of characters is fairly underdeveloped and often falls into predictable horror tropes. The performances are generally subpar, with the actors failing to bring depth to their roles and while Jeffrey Combs delivers a commendable performance as Colin Childress, his character has limited in screen time. This will most likely anger fans of Re-Animator and From Beyond who were most likely hoping this movie starred him and not a bunch of annoying kids. Another area where Cellar Dweller falls short is in its narrative structure as it suffers from a lack of cohesion with the transitions between scenes often feel disjointed. The film also fails to build suspense effectively and while the gore effects are decent you don’t really care about anyone so that lessens the impact, not to mention the “twist ending” that was predictable as it gets.

 

“If we burn the script they’ll be no evidence of our crimes.”

John Carl Buechler‘s Cellar Dweller falls short of its promising premise resulting in a bland horror experience, one that fails to captivate or even remotely entertain. The disjointed narrative, lack of genuine scares and forgettable characters make it difficult to recommend this film to anyone other than die-hard fans of 80s B-movie horror. With its dated effects and underwhelming execution, Cellar Dweller fails to leave a lasting impression and quickly fades into the abyss of forgettable horror misfires.

The Dungeonmaster (1984) – Review

What would you get if you mixed Disney’s science fiction classic Tron with a Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game but then hired seven directors to put it all together? The answer to that would be The Dungeonmaster a film by the legendary B-movie director Charles Band and is an entry either destined for greatness or the bargain bin at your local Walmart.

The film follows the story of Paul Bradford (Jeffrey Bryon), a skilled computer programmer who has developed a quasi-sentient personal computer named X-CaliBR8, which to the dismay of his girlfriend Gwen Rogers (Leslie Wing) has become a central focus of his life, to such a point that when Paul proposes marriages she says no because she is not willing to play second banana to a computer. Of course, this film isn’t about relationship problems in a world of evolving technology, not at all, this a sci-fi fantasy adventure tale and that aspect kicks into gear when Paul and Gwen suddenly find themselves pulled into a supernatural realm by a demonic sorcerer named Mestema (Richard Moll). I certainly didn’t see that coming. The basic plot that follows is that Gwen becomes a hostage and in order to save her Paul must face a series of challenges set within different fantasy settings.

 

“Hello my dear, would you like to trade up for a real man?”

But what exactly does an all-powerful sorcerer want with Paul? Has Hell developed a computer virus or perhaps he needs relationship advice of his own? Well, it seems that Mestema has spent millennia seeking a worthy opponent with whom to do battle, having defeated a long list of his enemies over the years with his magic, and now he has become bored.  He has since become intrigued with current technology and thinks that Paul could offer him, if not a challenge, at least an entertaining diversion. Outfitted with a plush costume and a portable version of X-CaliBR8 that Paul can wear on his wrist – this gives him critical information when needed as well as various laser beam attacks – our hero strides forth to save the fair damsel…or something along those lines. The most notable moment in this film is when Mestema conjures up a dragon for our hero to fight and Paul is able to use this high-tech wristband to create a dragon of his own.

 

Not exactly Disney level of animation but it’s pretty neat.

One of the notable aspects of The Dungeonmaster is its creative and diverse set of scenarios, each serving as a unique chapter within the larger narrative, from battling a frozen gallery of famous murderers to escaping sadistic Heavy Metal rockers, Paul confronts a range of imaginative challenges that put his skills and wits to the test, unfortunately, while these scenarios allow for an exploration of various genres, including science fiction, horror and even post-apocalyptic wastelands, the solution to most of these conflicts is Paul simply tapping a few buttons on his portable version of X-CaliBR8 to win and that gets old quickly. And sure, it’s a pretty impressive weapon but I bet he could have done even better if he’d had the Nintendo Power Glove instead.

 

“Do I double tap “X” and then shoot?”

Stray Observations:

• Paul Bradford has a “Smart Watch” that monitors and tracks his exercise routine and I have to wonder “Did this movie just introduce the idea of the Fitbit?”
• How do we know this movie was made in the 80s? Women are wearing Flashdance leg warmers and practice dance aerobics. If only a vengeful ninja would possess one of them.
• I guy yanked from our world to one of high fantasy had already done in the Dungeons & Dragons cartoon by Marvel Productions and it was a lot better than what we got here.
• X-CaliBR8 in forms Paul that Mestema equals Beelzebub, Belial and Satan.  If that’s the case I’m a little sad as I’d hate to think the actual ruler of Hell was bored enough to create virtual reality games to fight some dude from the 80s.
• Paul chases after a couple of little people who steal his computer wristband, despite several shots clearly showing him still wearing it. I guess the continuity girl was sick that day.
• The segment titled “Desert Pursuit” has a very Road Warrior post-apocalyptic vibe to it and consisted of vehicles from Charles Band’s previous film Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jared-Syn.
• This film includes the fantastic line “I reject your reality and substitute my own” and if for nothing else this science fiction/fantasy earns a gold star for that.

 

But who could honestly reject this reality?

The special effects and practical makeup work found in The Dungeonmaster are not what you would call great, however, the film compensates for its technical limitations with its sheer enthusiasm and willingness to embrace its B-movie charm and one cannot help but get caught up in it all. The action sequences are energetic and the cinematography, despite its occasional shortcomings, effectively captures the fantastical atmosphere of each scenario. There is one brief segment called “Stone Canyon Giant” where Paul must defeat a massive stone giant from an ancient Thai-inspired temple that was a nice nod to the classic stop-motion animation of the legendary effects genius Ray Harryhausen. Sadly, once again Paul simply defeats this awesome adversary by tapping on his wristband and destroying it with a laser beam.

 

Sinbad never relied on lasers or computers to win a fight.

Jeffrey Byron delivers a stilted performance as the film’s protagonist, attempting to portray the character’s determination and growth as he faces each new challenge and only halfway succeeding at this. On the other hand, Richard Moll’s portrayal of the sinister sorcerer Mestema is a highlight, his commanding presence and wicked charm infuses the film with a delightful touch of villainy and camp. Unfortunately, Leslie Wing as the girlfriend wasn’t given much to do because despite being introduced as a smart and independent woman she quickly becomes the “Damsel in Distress” which undermines her character to a distressing degree. But for me, the most disappointing element was the conclusion, after Paul defeats Mestema in hand-to-hand combat our two protagonists are simply sent home and Gwen quickly agrees to marry Paul, and then the film just rolls the end credits.  This was lazy and how much better would it have been if there had been a big reveal that X-CaliBR8 had actually created Mestema and all of those trials were orchestrated as a way to fix Paul and Gwen’s relationship?

 

“Paul, I think you need to get a software upgrade.”

Of course, that’s Monday Morning quarterbacking and we shouldn’t do that, but the film’s conclusion was far from the only problem for me, another key flaw of The Dungeonmaster was its narrative’s overarching thread that could have been developed further to provide a stronger sense of cohesion between the individual scenarios, instead of feeling like disjointed pieces from other movies that were stuck together by talented chimpanzees. Nonetheless, the film’s unique structure and quirky execution will make it an enjoyable watch for fans of cult classics and lovers of ’80s fantasy cinema, and despite its flaws, The Dungeonmaster remains an enjoyable watch for fans of ’80s B-movies.  Well, at least for those with a penchant for cheesy special effects and nostalgic gaming references. This film encapsulates the spirit of the era and offers a quirky blend of genres – on an incredibly low budget that is – which you kind of have to admire.

 

Who couldn’t find fun with Richard Moll as a sorcerer?

Charles Band’s The Dungeonmaster, known as Ragewar in some markets, may not be a polished masterpiece and Band is no cinematic pioneer, but the film certainly has its own brand of charm and with a meagre 80-minute running time, depending on what version you are watching, it doesn’t wear out it’s welcome. Its blend of genres, imaginative scenarios and a spirited performance by Richard Moll makes it entertaining experience that transports us to a world of magic and adventure.  If you’re willing to overlook its flaws and appreciate it for its campy charm, The Dungeonmaster just might transport you back to the golden age of practical effects and imaginative storytelling.

Woody Woodpecker Goes to Camp (2024) – Review

In 2017 Universal released its first live-action Woody Woodpecker movie to a less than stellar reception, garnering a 13% critic rating on Rotten Tomatoes, but because it finished second in the Brazilian box office – where Woody Woodpecker is insanely popular for reason – we are punished with this sequel.

Other than then featuring the title character there is no connection between this film and the previous live-action Woody Woodpecker movie so it’s best to consider this a standalone entry. Of course, I’d say it’s best to consider watching something else as this “sequel” is just another collection of tired kids’ movie clichés that were already old back in the 1980s. The plot of this movie deals with Woody Woodpecker (Eric Bauza) getting kicked out of the forest by Forest Ranger Walters (Patrick Williams) because all the other animals are sick of his crazy shenanigans – don’t ask me how you a bird can be kicked out of a forest – and the ranger tells him “You need to learn what it means to be part of a team. Until you learn what it means to be a team player, you’re no longer welcome here.” And with that piece of tough love, Woody is forced out into the wild…oh wait, isn’t that where he lives normally?

 

“We thought about having an intervention but you’re not worth it.”

His quest is short-lived as he almost immediately stumbles upon Camp Woo Hoo, a summer camp whose slogan is “Dedicated to Teamwork” – it’s right on the sign to make things easier for all concerned – and we must ask “Is that a case of fortuitous good luck or lazy writing?” Woody soon encounters and befriends Maggie (Chloe De Los Santos) a young camper who doesn’t seem to fit in as she apparently has no marketable skills – it should be noted that she is given a surprisingly good character arc where she learns her skill is in inspiring others – but her mom, Angie (Mary-Louise Parker), is more worried about the rivalry they have with neighbouring camp Hoo Rah, a military-themed camp run by her asshat cousin Zane (Josh Lawson), as well as the arrival of the Camp Inspector Wally Walrus (Tom Kenny) who loves to sight violations very every little thing and could revoke their license and shut the camp down. But camp rivalry and an anal-retentive walrus are not the only bits of conflict in this sequel, no sirree bob, we also have Buzz Buzzard (Kevin Michael Richardson) an escaped convict who exacerbates the rivalry between the two camps so as to remove any obstacle in his search for lost treasure.

 

“This will be as easy as taking candy from lazy scriptwriters.”

Wait a minute, what lost treasure? Well, it turns out that Camp Woo Hoo and Camp Hoo Rah have a complicated history; they share one important relative, Grandpappy Obidiah Mallard (Ian Rooney), a prospector who came here during the gold rush to find his fortune and legend has it he struck it rich and bought land that he then named Camp Obidiah, a place where his whole family could live and prosper.  Unfortunately, by the time his sons came out to join him he had died and the rest of the gold was nowhere to be found. Because his sons disagreed on everything – one being a soldier and the other an artist –  they split the land into two separate camps and thus began the rivalry between them and it has existed ever since.  Every year they hold a competition called “The Wilderness Games” to prove which camp is better and, needless to say, the grunts at Camp Hoo Rah always win over their nerdy neighbours.

 

You’d have more fan at Camp Crystal Lake

This is your typical underdog story, with the residents of Camp Woo Hoo consisting of nonathletic nerds and geeks while those of Camp Hoo Rah are athletic jerks and bullies. And as sure as the sun rises in the east our band of misfits will find themselves in a depressed funk as they realize they can’t compete with their brawny rivals, but then an inspirational speech will motivate them to victory, with Angie telling her young charges “You can’t run from the bullies of this world your whole life. If you work together…you never know what can happen. You might find something inside you that you never knew you had.” And Maggie will then deduce how each of her camp mates can you their particular skills to win each contest. But despite all these inspirational moments, winning the big game isn’t the only plot development, we also have to worry about Buzz Buzzard who running around and manipulating things behind the scenes.

 

Talk about being behind the 8 Ball.

The fiendish buzzard frames Woody for the destruction of Camp Woo Hoo’s rec room which results in Wally Walrus declaring that he has no choice but to shut the camp down. Woody then gets the brilliant idea that if Camp Woo wins the “Wilderness Games” it will prove that they are good enough to be a camp. Unsurprisingly, Zane agrees to this challenge because his camp has never lost a game in their very long history. I must now ask the question “How in the hell does their winning “The Big Game” change the fact that the inspector deemed Camp Woo Hoo unsafe?” Wally Walrus wasn’t closing the camp down because they were losers, he was closing it down because of the numerous safety and structural violations.

 

“Who needs proper safety laws when we have camp spirit?”

Stray Observations:

• Woody getting in trouble with what looks like a park ranger seems more in keeping with a Yogi Bear plotline than that of a Woody Woodpecker story.
• Woody is kicked out of the forest for not being “A Team Player” so he crosses the street and joins Camp Woo Hoo, but aren’t they part of the same forest?
• It is lightly implied that Buzz Buzzard murdered Camp Hoo Rah’s cook so he could take his place, if only this movie had gone further into the darkness we could have had a fun comedy instead of this generic mess.
• Buzz Buzzard orders a variety of tech gadgets to use against Camp Woo Hoo, all of which are accidentally thwarted by Woody.  This all reeks of ACME supply company found in the Road Runner and Coyote cartoons.
• Camp Woo Hoo’s resident gamer expert is able to visualize the obstacle course as a video game and this somehow allows her to win because we all know video game skills translate perfectly to the world of athletics.

 

Does she also know any handy cheat codes?

To say that this offering is a derivative half-assed comedy would be a vast understatement as not only does it lack any semblance of originality in its 98-minute running time it also pales in comparison to the other films that make up the “Summer Camp Movie” subgenre. This is despite the fact that its lifting of plot elements from several of them, if you’ve watched films like the animated classic Race for Your Life, Charlie Brown or the Bill Murray comedy Meatballs you’ll know where this is going, and even if you look past all the tired tropes and clichés it trots out as if on a tight schedule it also has a plot that makes little to no sense and is infused with humour that would be hard pressed to make even an eight-year-old chuckle. It’s also weird that in the 2017 Woody Woodpecker movie, Woody was the only anthropomorphized character in the film, in fact, people couldn’t understand him at all – Woody only spoke to the audience in moments of breaking the fourth wall – but in this film, not only can Woody now communicate with humans we also have an escaped convict buzzard and a camp inspector who is a walrus and I must ask “Why does no one find a walrus as a camp inspector concerning?”

 

Is this a case of affirmative action out of control?

Of course, I must point out that I’m not the target audience for this type of thing as not only am I not a small child I was never a fan of the original Walter Lantz cartoons – I always found Woody Woodpecker to be more annoying than funny – but while I’m sure some kids will find a few things here to be at least a little amusing – kids do love their poo and fart jokes –there are so many better options out there to choose from that I can’t even recommend this film to anyone of any age.