Carl's 5-Minute Horror Reviews

[The Hitman]

Mountaintop Motel Massacre (1983): ... Avoid. 4/10.

Out of curiosity, how does your comparative numbering scale work?

If this one is to be avoided, why does it merit 4/10? Which is by no means a great rating, but suggests below average, rather than death-on-a-bun.

Why not, say, 1/10 or 2/10 or even 0/10?

I might see a 4/10 if it has something going for it (say, "Ghost Ship," which gets about a 4/10, and about 3 of those 4 for the opening/middle sequences of violence on the ship in the '50s). But your review doesn't suggest this film has anything to make it worth seeing.

[dragonmanes]

I rate films similarly to the class curve you would see in a college classroom, not based on the IMDB rating system where apparently a 5 constitutes an average film. On my scale, a 7 equates to a "C", which would be an average flick with fair acting, an ok plot, some originality, and ok dialouge. A 6 would then be a "D", and a 5 means you fail. It is hard for me to rate any film lower than a 6 if the film made a valid effort, and just didnt pull it off for one reason or another. For a film to get a 5 or lower on my scale, it really has to earn it, much like you have to go above and beyond just not doing the work to fail in college.

In MMM's case, the cinematography and set design contribute to what little score it did receive, and even though I would recommend avoiding it, it still has to set a spectrum of bad against other films that somehow manage to be even worse. If this film is rated a 4, then by comparison you can only imagine how bad a film like Sorority Babes in the Dane-a-thon of Doom would be at a 2! The 4 MMM earned is a low F, 40/100 on a test, but I cant overlook the fact that at some level, some effort was made, just not necessarily by the actors or director. Given my limited format, its just difficult to get into all of the flaws of the film, but still include that the lighting and sets were ok while trying to hit 500 words. I prioritize the comments based on what I feel had the most impact on the rating.

Hope that gives some insight into the ratings system. My ratings scale varies dramatically from most other reviewers that I know of, and although I do add some subjective influence into the scores, I try to rate the films based on overall merit with the consideration of the budget (esp in the case of indie films), and I will note separately if a film's rating differs from its entertainment level.

[dragonmanes]

Raw Meat (1972): Surprisingly small in scope, but effective suspence/mystery from England. Donald Pleasence plays an eccentric police detective trying to track down a killer in the Underground. Bodies are disappearing, but what he doesnt know is that theyre being eaten! The Descent and Creep have definitely benefited from different aspects of the plot, but with dark, brooding atmosphere and lighting, awesome gory effects, and superior set design, this movie sets itself apart as something new and different for the time. 8/10.

The Night Stalker (1972): Before there were the X-Files, Carl Kolchak was on the case as a smartallicky reporter tracking the deaths of 5 girls that had been drained of blood in Las Vegas. This made for tv vampire romp offers excellent acting and smart but subtle effects, with Darren McGavin stealing the spotlight in every scene. The audience is left guessing whether the killings are supernatural up until the end, which comes all too quickly in this fast paced but short flick. Followed up by The Night Strangler and Kolchak: The Series, each of which come highly recommended! 8/10.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923): This tale introduces a love triangle between the gypsie Esmerelda, an evil aristocrat, and a guardsman caught between a class struggle thats ended with the help of a disfigured hermit. The scale of this film is unbelieveable, with literally hundreds if not thousands of participants flooding the scenes in accurate period ensamble. Chaney commands yet another role as Quasimodo the Hunchback, with more impressive early makeup work. The film has been touched by time, but put into the perspective in which it was made, it is a masterwork of early film from the silent era and a solid classic! 9/10.

[dragonmanes]

World Gone Mad (1933): When the DA is killed under mysterious circumstances related to massive stock fraud, it is up to a sluethful reporter to crack the case. Another misplaced entry in the Horror Classics 50-pack, which is much more a murder mystery than anything. The usual bland pulp acting, fast talkers, 30s humor.. Offers little to the average horror fan. Pass. 4/10.

[Sham]

The Phatom of the Opera (1925): A mysterious figure kidnaps an opera singer and proposes to coach her into taking the lead role in the opera as a means of winning her love, but when she learns of his disfigurement, she attempts to escape his grasp. The production designs and makeup work are both amazing for the time, with the opera set still being one of the largest studio sets ever built. Erik is both empathetic and terrifying at the same time as the elusive phantom, and Chaney remains the definitive face of the character nearly a century later. Most of the violence is implied off camera, so dont expect a lot of action, but the film is still very good, though it may not suit the tastes of modern horror fans. 9/10.

Love this movie! I actually saw it for the first time without really wanting to watch it.

My older sister would sometimes come over to my parents' house to stay the night, and her old bedroom shares a wall with the home theater. So when she would go to bed early, and I'd want to stay up a little longer and watch a movie, she'd bitch and moan in the morning about how all the noise kept her up most of the night.

So to remedy this, I put in The Phantom of the Opera one night and was blown away, so much that it's now sort of a tradition for me to watch it whenever she visits.

[The Hitman]

I rate films similarly to the class curve you would see in a college classroom, not based on the IMDB rating system where apparently a 5 constitutes an average film. On my scale, a 7 equates to a "C", which would be an average flick with fair acting, an ok plot, some originality, and ok dialouge. A 6 would then be a "D", and a 5 means you fail. It is hard for me to rate any film lower than a 6 if the film made a valid effort, and just didnt pull it off for one reason or another. For a film to get a 5 or lower on my scale, it really has to earn it, much like you have to go above and beyond just not doing the work to fail in college.

Thanks!

If you're doing it like a grade, why not do grades? For more detailed comparison? (i.e. an F vs. an F-, as it were.)

When we started here, I was doing grades rather than stars (though, later, we all switched to one system in the interests of unity and comparison).

If that's your thinking, why not make it more apparent? I know the "bottom line" scoring isn't for everyone (Roger Ebert, for instance, often laments having to give movies a star rating, even though he helped pioneer the most "basic" movie rating of all, thumbs-up or -down, either/or) but might it not make your thought process more clear?

[dragonmanes]

I had considered it, but the F would bear so much more weight for movies I would rate a 5 compared to the ones I would rate a 1. Ive just been doing it like this for so long its stuck, but Ill definitely think it over to see what Im more comfortable with! Thanks for reading man, in the end its all in good fun

[dragonmanes]

The Lawnmower Man (1992): It is a pity that this well-crafted Cyber Punk film will likely continue to lose appeal with new audiences as it ages, because it is very enjoyable and was groundbreaking at the time of its release. Even today, some of the effects like the scenes of Jobe's mental collapse visualized on screen hold up very well, but other visual effects like the polygonal hornets are extremely outdated. The underlying fears of a world controlled and dominated by a virtual takeover are even more prevalent today in a society reliant on computers and the internet, so the film does continue to work on some level. Overall, it is a very good film that may be past its prime, but is completely worth revisiting. A virtual reality developer enhances a dullards brain powers, accidentally giving him extra-sensory powers that he becomes unable to control. 8/10.

The House that Screamed (1969): Although the film is good in nearly every aspect of actual filmmaking, the pacing kills and the plot is extremely drawn out considering the simplicity of the final reveal. Girls at a reform school continue to run away from the overbearing and spiteful head mistress, but what no one knows is they aren't leaving the campus alive! A few suspenseful murders, but they are few and far between. The acting and dialogue are enough to generate interest though, and the reveal at the end wont fail to please. Its good, but not very action oriented. 7/10.

[dragonmanes]

Night Warning (1983): Billy gets caught up in a murder investigation when he is caught holding the knife his aunt killed a potential suitor with. The plot thickens when the police investigator finds out that both the victim and Billy may have been gay lovers caught in a lovers quarrel. This unique slasher breaks many taboos, involving homosexuality, incest, and homophobia. After a long but competent build, the tension breaks into a bloody finale. Good overall story and acting, with unconventional turns and a powerful finish. Recommended as an obscure slasher gem! 7/10.

[dragonmanes]

Night School (1981): Surprising little slasher gem that has a higher cinematic style than most cheap slasher cashins of the time, along with a few creative deaths (the most memorable being the not-so-merry-go-round). Students of a night school are being stalked and decapitated by a mysterious figure clad in motocycle leathers complete with helmet. Decent pace, standard characters, but a fun watch with plenty of kills. Ranks below House on Sorority Row or Happy Birthday to Me, but it's far better than The Forest or Graduation Day. 6/10.

[dragonmanes]

Evilspeak (1981): Clint Howard plays a dork in a military academy that suffers at his peers feet. He unlocks an ancient and evil book through his computer, then uses Satanic powers to exact his revenge. Howards terrible acting is only outweighed by his sheer ugliness, but outside of a few sweet sets and a bloody ending, the film is a boring drag. We get several hints of suspence that drop off immediately, leaving only the last 10m with any action and brutal gore. Excellent concept, poor execution. 5/10, Gore: 7/10.

[dragonmanes]

Uncle Sam (1997): Fucking terrible. Bill Lustig, of Maniac and Maniac Cop fame, brings us a boring, stupid slasher about a fallen soldier returning home a zombie, only to wreak havok on unamericans at home in an Uncle Sam costume (ironically, his name was Sam, and he's an uncle). Barfy acting, contrived plot and dialogue, and terrible puns all run amok. The film makes attempts at a socio-politico agenda, but it feels entirely forced and this was definitely the wrong film to prove it. A few ok kills, but not worth the watch. Rating: 3/10. Gore: 6/10.

Tetsuo: The Iron Man (1989): This Experimental Japanese horror flick combines elements of Eraserhead and Akira in a futuristic nightmare. A man becomes a living machine after a fateful accident and some interesting repair work. Shot in a completely non-linear style in black and white, with insane imagery and rough but effective editing style, this flick offers amazing visuals but may be too out there for the average horror fan. Does one rate it on originality? Concept? Design? Recommended for an abstract visual experience much in the vein of David Lynch. Tetsuo fans should also be sure to check out Meatball Machine for a comic exaggeration of the same body horror theme. Rating: No Rating.

Red Room (1999): Purely exploitative shock that fails to impress or disgust, leaving the audience with nothing to walk away with. If youre in to people being tortured, drinking piss, and being raped with broken light bulbs, take it, its all yours, but dont expect a cohesive and interesting storyline to tie it all together. Four game show participants must command each other to do whatever it takes to have the others quit in order to win $10M yen. There is some gore, but even that is tame. Leave this to the Exploitation fans. Rating: 5/10. Gore: 7/10.

[dragonmanes]

The Night Strangler (1973): This made for tv sequel picks up right where The Night Stalker left us, with Kolchak in Seattle hot on a new story about a killer strangling women every 21 years to rejuvinate himself with an elixir of life. The story feels formulaic, closely following the successful structure of the original, but that doesnt necessarily hurt it. McGavin is as strong as ever, pushing the buttons of the local police and annoying Vincenzo with his sharp tongue and quick wit. The film's finale takes us into a huge underground lair beneath the city, giving the film a much larger feel and scope. Though the first film is slightly better, this is another excellent made for tv entry and highly recommended!

Rating: 7/10.

[shiki-jitsu]

Why no rating for Tetsuo?

[The Hitman]

Why no rating for Tetsuo?

He couldn't compete with my review of Meatball Machine.