Stone Cold (1991)

Revenge of the 90s!

Brian Bosworth is Joe Huff, a policeman on suspension. The F.B.I. has other plans for him though. The biker gang “The Brotherhood” is waging war against all those who oppose them and after one of their members is found guilty in the murder of a priest time is in short supply. Joe goes undercover as John Stone (a fitting name) to infiltrate the gang. Action ensues.

Right from the start you know this is going to be a fast and furious ride. Bosworth establishes himself as the cool and cold messenger of justice within the opening minutes. Criminals will pay when he’s around! He works perfectly for what this role demands; tough guy with an attitude. This isn’t supposed to be Shakespeare, though I’d watch him in that as well. The biker gang is led by the very capable Lance Henriksen and his lead henchman played by William Forsythe. The latter had an even more menacing turn that year as Richie in Steven Seagal action fest Out for Justice. Both Henriksen and Forsythe do what is required when portraying evil, white supremacist bikers. Their range is a lot broader, but they respect the material and seem to have fun with it.

The great thing about Stone Cold is the pacing. So many movies with little to say spend too much time saying it. Most of what we see in Stone Cold is essential. It’s a very economic movie that doesn’t bother with non-vital information. When the bad guys are gone, the movie ends. There’s no need for a long wrap-up. The action is over. But the action we are treated to during Stone Cold is quite satisfactory. What makes it so you think? Well, there are regular doses of great explosions. Real explosions. There are dangerous stunts to keep you grinning. When people are shot you see it. I miss that in movies, particularly when you look at something as castrated as Live Free or Die Hard (terrible title!). They also swear when it’s appropriate. You expect a certain language from people like this. The third act ups the stakes and the action here works better than what we see in most movies of similar kind today. It balances it with restrained humor, showing glimmer without ever fully indulging. There is no annoying sidekick constantly puncturing the atmosphere. Stone Cold also takes a few original turns leaving some common clichés in the attic that had me nodding in approval.

What Stone Cold is all about!

Craig R. Baxley has proven himself to be a reliable director with Dark Angel (1990) and mini-series like Storm of the Century and Rose Red, both Stephen King adaptations. He has also directed and been second unit director on plenty of episodes of The A-Team. Way to go Mr. Baxley! I for one am a fan of the man. All directors can’t be Stanley Kubrick or Sam Peckinpah and that is just fine. Baxley is still a director I keep coming back to. He deserves a nod more frequently and I hope you give him a chance too.

As for Stone Cold it’s a great example of early 90s action that is easy to digest. It’s a fun, violent and bullshit-free film. Relax and let officer Joe Huff take care of business. That’s what he’s here for!

7/10

Guinea Pig (1985)

Torture for the people…

Guinea Pig is the first installment in one of the most notorious movie series out there. It’s also known as Guinea Pig: Devil’s Experiment, probably to differentiate it from the later entries. The plot is a girl being tortured by three men for nearly 43 minutes. The end. It doesn’t exactly sound groundbreaking, but in terms of fake snuff or pseudo-snuff if you will, it kind of is.

It’s roughly divided into chapters where each one is a new form of torture. The first one is “Hit” where our helpless victim is, that’s right, slapped repeatedly. She is also kicked, tortured by deafening noise for a long duration, scolded, maimed etc. This actually works quite well. While it’s fairly graphic, director Satoru Ogura presents it in a very neutral way. Yes, this is pseudo-snuff, but the depictions are decidedly unspectacular. Particularly the scene where the victim is beaten and kicked becomes repetitious and boring. That can be a good thing when depicting bad things. I was never comfortable with what I was watching and it never entertained me. If anything Guinea Pig fulfills more of a morbid curiosity. Just because something isn’t pleasant doesn’t mean it can’t be intriguing.

Guinea Pig's pièce de résistance.

Guinea Pig is shot-on-video, which adds to the grittiness of the film. It looks cheap and dirty like it should. The camerawork is nothing spectacular and I sincerely doubt the raw effect would pack such a punch otherwise. There is some music in Guinea Pig that the movie would have worked better without, unless they had incorporated it into the movie as opposed to put it on top. The same goes for the title cards. I’m not saying psychopaths aren’t able to edit movies, but it increases the distance between the movie and the viewer. I want no “interruptions” that hints at what we see on-screen has been subjected to any treatment beyond recording. This is a cruel matter-of-fact testament shot on-the-run. The sound effects are suitably unpleasant and play a big part in making this film feel as grim as it does.

Using the term “like” doesn’t feel appropriate when discussing Guinea Pig. It’s a fake snuff film and anyone watching it should expect just that. To me the first film in the series manages to create a dark atmosphere showcasing mankind at its worst. The first sequel, Guinea Pig: Flowers of Flesh and Blood, is a far more graphic affair, while simultaneously adding some oddball humor for balance. Each installment has something different to offer.

Guinea Pig remains one of the nastier films out there. It has been surpassed since by numerous others, Psycho: The Snuff Reels being one, but as a testament to extreme 80s horror it holds up very well.

8/10

Blood and Sex Nightmare (2008)

Blood and sex finally united on film!

Spoilers! You can thank me later.

Blood and Sex Nightmare starts off by showing us a tied-up woman and a maniac sharpening his butcher knife. She dies, but only after the camera has turned away, because some movies are like that. It’s quite a dull opening really. Then the movie proceeds…

Right from the beginning it’s evident that this is bottom of the barrel modern exploitation. I don’t mind that, in theory. This is quite basic filmmaking, but was it for instance really necessary to ever so slightly adjust the camera in several scenes? Couldn’t the director and director of photography come to terms with the composition before shooting? I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt that this was a conscious decision. That still makes it annoying since you’re taken out of the movie. Random zooming also occurs, but lacks the flavor of someone like Joe D’Amato.

Anyway, there is this guy Nick and his girlfriend Amy. Amy has just come back from something, not really of any importance, and Nick wants her to come with him to an adult resort called “Pleasure Mountain”. Amy doubtfully agrees. The punch line is that she’s a virgin, which makes an adult resort less ideal. That’s kind of funny, isn’t it? During their short, yet way too long conversation, the dialogue battles for your concentration along with the sound of horror trailers playing in the background. For the record, I recommend focusing on the trailer sounds. They are so much more interesting. Kudos to whoever gave us the option to choose though.

They arrive at their destination only to discover a rather pathetic looking cabin. There are no shots trying to establish how the resort looks as a whole, but I suspect this has a perfectly natural explanation. Good filmmakers make separate locations that are supposed to be one seem as one. You could argue that it’s part of the charm, unless you’re me. It’s obvious that this is made by horror fans. The camp is promoted as a Camp Crystal Lake sort of place, with an old guy sure they are all doomed! The old guy is actually the caretaker, Walter. He has arguably the best lines in the movie, such as: “They’re gonna be dead soon. Then she’ll be mine!” Best of luck to you Walter!

To up the body count we meet some of the other sex seekers at the camp. One of the cabins is particularly bizarre. An incest role-play is acted out like a sitcom complete with laugh track. It’s the boldest attempt at humor in the movie and perhaps even a try to soften cynical reviewers? All the deaths are done off-screen, which indicates just how low the budget really is. Making blood splatter appears to be cheap fortunately! They even cut away before someone, Willy, punctures one of the tires on Nick’s car. But hey, I’m not going to argue for destroying a perfectly good tire! That car probably brought the crew to the location and without it where would they be? Really?

This is also a supernatural film, since a straight-forward slasher would be a copout. Sarcasm check! It turns out that a guy, Felix Gallo, died here years ago. He hung himself and his pedophile mother is given the blame. All the sexual tensions of the resort have made him come back. Boggaboo!

As if this wasn’t enough we have a couple of slackers working at the resort watching horror. They actually seemed to be watching a movie with the ghost of Felix Gallo. I dare you to confirm this on your own! “Do you think movie violence fucks you up? I don’t know, but it’s awesome!” That did make me chuckle, a little. Blood and Sex Nightmare trying to give us that additional layer is a perfectly redundant choice.

Amy defeats the ghostly ghoul with a mirror, because mirrors can be like that. The 59 minute running time is near the end. Cut to two years later, same place and a recycled ending done to death. I had to ask myself if it’s spoofing clichés or just perpetuating them. My guess would be the latter.

Blood and Sex Nightmare is a dull film. Despite my hostility I don' hate it. Someone has created something that is out there for the masses to behold. It is what it is, but couldn’t that be something a little more worthwhile?

2/10

Cinemabarrel: The Resurrection

I originally began writing here after a friend of mine made this lovely page so that I could exorcise my thoughts on movies, of which there are many. Yet, somehow during the year life and a healthy dose of apathy got in the way. It's a shame since I really enjoy writing and in particular when it comes to movies. So for several months there has been nothing. Fortunately, like with Jason Vorhees, there is always the possibility of resurrection. My goal this year is one post every week. Everything else is a bonus. I want to keep writing for myself more than anything and this is the perfect place. While my focus will continue to be on that of horror and exploitation I'll try to show greater variety with genres. 

During October I participated in the imdb horror boards annual Horror challenge, which consists of watching 31 horror films, where at least 16 has to be first time viewings. This has never been a problematic goal. The challenge for me was/is watching as many horror films you can bare before Halloween sneaks up. I managed to watch 100 movies (well, one is a stand-alone episode in Stephen King based miniseries Nightmares & Dreamscapes) and it was EXHAUSTING! Previous years my average have been around 60 movies. Some people have asked; How do you find the time? It's all priorities. I'm not claiming the priorities are always the right ones though. October is usually followed by a lot less horror oriented November. A friend of mine participated in the challenge as well and took pride in beating my ass with nearly 120 movies during that month. I'm still only scratching the horror surface here, so it will be interesting to see what the new year has in store. Stay tuned! I'll leave you with a freaky poster for the Polish vampire film I Like Bats (1986).