Black Christmas one sheet movie poster image courtesy Heritage Auction Galleries

Director Bob Clark and Warner Bros. brought the offbeat horror flick Black Christmas to American movie theaters in 1974. Olivia Hussey and Margot Kidder play the terrorized sorority sisters, with John Saxon as the police detective.

Bob Clark Directs Black Christmas

Black Christmas was the brainchild of Canadian writer Roy Moore, who had acquired the idea for his creepy story – that of a man making bizarre phone calls to sorority houses – after reading about similar events which  had allegedly occurred in major cities around the world during a 12-month period. Moore’s script was originally titled The Babysitter, which morphed into Stop Me, then Silent Night, Evil Night and, ultimately, Black Christmas.

Bob Clark and Gerry Arbeid produced Black Christmas in cooperation with Canadian Film Development and Famous Players. Clark (Porky’s, A Christmas Story) also directed and added his input to Roy Moore’s oversexed screenplay.

Olivia Hussey and Keir Dullea Head Black Christmas Cast

Olivia Hussey (Jessica Bradford), Keir Dullea (Peter Smythe), Margot Kidder (Barb Coard) and John Saxon (Lt. Kenneth Fuller) head the cast. Other players include Marian Waldman (Mrs. MacHenry), Andrea Martin (Phyllis Carlson), James Edmond (Mr. Harrison), Doug McGrath (Sgt. Nash), Art Hindle (Chris Hayden), Lynne Griffin (Clare Harrison), Michael Rapport (Patrick Cornell) and Les Carlson (Bill Graham).

Edmond O’Brien was originally cast as Lt. Fuller, but failing health forced him to withdraw. O’Brien later died at age 69 of Alzheimer’s disease in 1985.

Black Christmas Filmed in Toronto

Budgeted at $620,000, Black Christmas was filmed from March to May 1974 in Toronto, Canada. The University of Toronto/Victoria College served as the principal location. Selected as the terrorized sorority was Hart House at 6 Belmont Street in Toronto. Better known today as simply the “Black Christmas House,” the old home has since been renovated, with every wall taken down and rebuilt and the outside white stucco removed and painted a different color. Also getting the axe was the home’s huge tree on the main lawn, which was cut down because it blocked the light into several rooms.

Black Christmas: Agnes, It’s Me, Billy…

Black Christmas opens at a sorority house, where a group of girls are gathered for a holiday party. Jessica, Barb and Phyllis, along with the other girls, begin receiving a series of obscene phone calls from an unknown caller they have dubbed “The Moaner.” In time, the unidentified stranger exhibits a more ghoulish bent, using a variety of different voices.

When shy sorority sister Clare turns up missing, the police are called in to investigate. The unfortunate Clare, however, has matriculated upstairs to the attic where she is wrapped in plastic and cooling her heels for good in a rocking chair. Mrs. MacHenry, the ex-vaudevillian house-mother, doesn’t fare much better, as she later encounters the psychotic killer who plants a crane hook in her face.

Although slow to react, Lt. Fuller and his boy scouts eventually trace the mysterious phone calls back to the sorority house. Jess, believing that the crazy perp is her boyfriend Peter, later whacks him over the head, killing the big lug. With Peter dead, the police now believe that the reign of terror is over.

“Agnes, it’s me, Billy,” the words are spoken. The telephone then rings, signaling that the real killer is still on the prowl – maybe. 

Black Christmas Opens in Canada

Black Christmas opened in Canada on October 11, 1974. It was later released in the United States on December 20, 1974, under the title Silent Night, Evil Night. The movie did poorly under that moniker, so the title was changed back to Black Christmas.

“Black Christmas, a bloody, senseless kill-for-kicks feature, exploits unnecessary violence in a university sorority house operated by an implausibly alcoholic ex-hoofer,” scoffed Variety.

“Black Christmas is the best chiller of the year, a creepy, murderous suspense film with an ending guaranteed to rattle what’s left of your sensibilities after the movie’s hour and 45-minute onslaught,” reported the Boston Evening Globe.

Film Analysis: Can You Hear Me Now?

Although successful in its day, Black Christmas has taken on an entirely new status in recent years – cult film extraordinaire. In fact, many consider the picture to be the prototype of the contemporary slasher movie, giving rise to such similarly “bent” fare as Halloween (1978), Friday the 13th (1980), A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), Scream (1996) and I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997).

Black Christmas is a bloody riot to watch, with Albert J. Dunk’s camera mainly serving as the point-of-view for the killer. The obscene phone call bit seems quaint now, as today’s creeps would probably send an anonymous email or text message, or maybe use Triond’s forum. The less bright of the bunch might try to phone, but a lack of minutes would probably doom their cause.  

Black Christmas was remade by writer-director Glen Morgan in 2006. Released on Christmas Day (now that’s sick), Morgan’s version was much gorier than the original in disposing of its victims, which included an icicle through the skull, electrocution, beheading by a pair of ice skates, a candy cane through the neck and even impalement on a Christmas tree. Say what you want, but no one can accuse Morgan of not getting into the holiday spirit.

View Black Christmas at your own peril. Just don’t confuse either version with Irving Berlin’s White Christmas or Elvis Presley’s Blue Christmas. Bing Crosby isn’t here, and neither is Colonel Tom Parker.

Black Christmas Box Office, Trivia, DVD

• Black Christmas grossed $4.053 million at the American box office.
• Malcolm McDowell, Bette Davis and Gilda Radner all turned down roles in the original.
• Black Christmas was telecast over NBC-TV under the title Stranger in the House.
• On DVD: Black Christmas Special Edition with the interview feature The Twelve Days of Black Christmas (Somerville House, 2006).

“Sergeant Nash, I don’t think you could pick your nose without written instructions,” Lt. Fuller tells one of his cops.

And these guys are going to find the killer? Ho, ho, ho…

The story surrounds the party of Angela Field (Elizabeth Shannon) the girl who needs to have the best of everything. To add shock value to her party she has decided to host it at an old mansion which is rumored to be haunted.  Years earlier a group of party goers all met their death on one fateful night. As the party begins to kick off drugs are rife, and its not long before the cops are tipped off about this illegal party. With a clutch of stragglers left behind and a strange accident the group discover a hidden room filled with skeletons, and in doing so unleash a curse that has been buried for nearly a hundred years.

Showing a good seven months before the rest of the world get to see it Night Of The Demons was not a particularly anticipated movie of the festival. It seemed for the most part that people were not looking forward to the remake, and I confess I was one of them. To my surprise I really quite enjoyed the movie, its nice to watch a horror movie that you need to give little thought to. This was typical 80’s fare bought forward to a new generation, and while it will not become part of a trend it sits alone in a list of burgeoning horror movies.

As I mentioned earlier the impressive aspect of the movie was the scares, and these were the best type, the sudden jumps. It was most impressive to watch people arms flying all over the place a number of times as various assorted creatures burst through walls and mirrors. More impressive of all was that every single one was expected, you knew it was coming but it still caused scares. At one point there were three such jumps all in close succession, giving viewers little rest.

Night of the demons does need an awful lot to be desired, but for what it was it worked very well and I personally believe delivered the festivals biggest surprises.

On the subject of surprises it was good to see the return of Terminator 2 star Edward Furlong, who stars rather ironically as a drug dealer who gate crashes the party in order to earn some fast money to pay a debt to his supplier. Furlong looks overweight and has stubby little hands and barely resembles the Furlong from Terminator. Still, the actor proved he could still act and formed the movies rather unexpected male hero.

The lead character however, and best performance comes from Bobbi Sue Luthor who plays Suzanne. Watch this actress as I’m sure we will see big things from her over the next few years, perhaps even taking the scream queen mantle from Linnea Quigley who also makes a brief cameo here as a demented ballerina. It was good to see the return of American Pie actress Shannon Elizabeth who proves that she can still act and look stunning.

At the end of the movie Adam Gierasch, Jace Anderson (his wife) Bobbi Sue Luthor and other members of the cast took to the stage for a Q & A. From the questioning the movie was well received.

Night Of The Demons opens in US cinemas from February 2010, with the rest of the year seeing the movie from next summer.

Image via Wikipedia

Frankenstein 1931 movie herald image courtesy Heritage Auction Galleries

Carl Laemmle and Universal Pictures delivered the horrific Frankenstein to movie theaters in 1931. Boris Karloff plays the monster and Colin Clive its sinister, god-like creator. It’s alive! It’s alive!

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Frankenstein is based on the 1818 novel Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley and the subsequent 1927 stage production by Peggy Webling. Frankenstein, starring Charles Ogle, was first filmed in 1910 by the Edison Company. That was followed by Life Without Soul in 1915 and an Italian picture titled Master of Frankenstein in 1920.

Carl Laemmle’s Frankenstein owes its impetus to the success of another Universal Pictures horror film, 1931’s Dracula starring Bela Lugosi, which had debuted ten months earlier. Universal was looking for another horror vehicle in which to cast Lugosi, with writer-director Robert Florey coming up with several possibilities, including The Invisible Man, The Murders in the Rue Morgue and Frankenstein.

Florey fashioned a five-page Frankenstein outline which was later followed by a full-length screenplay. A two-reel test was then filmed using the old Dracula castle set, with a heavily made-up Lugosi playing the monster in the pivotal creation scene.

Dissatisfied with Florey’s direction and Lugosi’s sympathetic portrayal of the monster, Universal released both. In order to avoid legal complications, however, the studio quickly assigned Florey to another of its pictures, Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932), starring Bela Lugosi.

James Whale Directs Frankenstein

Frankenstein was produced by Carl Laemmle Jr., the 23-year-old son of the head of Universal Pictures. John Balderston, Francis Edward Faragoh and Garrett Fort wrote the screenplay, with James Whale in the director’s chair. David Broekman and Bernhard Kaun delivered the eerie, primitive music score and Arthur Edeson and Paul Ivano served as cinematographers.

Colin Clive (Dr. Henry Frankenstein), Mae Clarke (Elizabeth), John Boles (Victor Moritz) and Boris Karloff (The Monster) head the cast. Other players include Edward Van Sloan (Dr. Waldman), Frederick Kerr (Baron Frankenstein), Dwight Frye (Fritz), Lionel Belmore (Herr Vogel), Marilyn Harris (Little Maria), Francis Ford (Hans) and Arletta Duncan (Bridesmaid).

Frankenstein Filmed at Universal City 

Budgeted at $291,000, Frankenstein was filmed from August to October 1931 at Universal City, Universal Pictures’ sprawling 230-acre municipality located in California’s San Fernando Valley.  Other California locations used included Lake Sherwood,  Malibou Lake in Agoura and Busch Gardens in Pasadena, with the latter serving as the convalescent scene.

Makeup artist Jack P. Pierce had the monumental task of turning Boris Karloff into the hideous Frankenstein monster. Karloff’s imposing ensemble consisted of a square rubber head with lizard eyes, two pairs of pants, steel struts for stiffening the legs, a pair of 30-pound boots, gobs of blue-green greasepaint, mounds of heavy padding and lots of plaster. In all, the makeup process took five hours each day, with an additional two hours needed for removal.

Karloff’s monster costume was kept a closely guarded secret until the movie’s release, with Uncle Boris taking his meals in private and donning a black hood while being transported to various sound stages.

Frankenstein: It’s Alive! It’s Alive!

Frankenstein opens in a fog-shrouded cemetery at midnight where Dr. Frankenstein and his hunchback dwarf assistant, Fritz, are trolling for freshly-buried bodies. The Doc then takes his human cargo back to his old watchtower laboratory where he stitches the male corpses together, forming a single lifeless cadaver.

Fritz is sent to a nearby university in order to retrieve a preserved human brain. In a panic, the dwarf accidentally grabs a jar bearing the ominous label, “Criminal Brain,” and delivers it to his master.

With the horrified Dr. Waldman, Victor Moritz and his fiancee Elizabeth in attendance, Dr. Frankenstein proceeds with his latest experiment. Raising the cadaver on a huge platform to the top of the tower, Frankenstein captures the strikes of a series of lightning bolts that transfer their energy into his creation.

Initially, the creature remains motionless, but then a hand suddenly twitches. Catching this small movement, the power-mad Frankenstein shouts in triumph, “It’s alive – it’s alive – it’s alive…Oh, in the name of God. Now I know what it feels like to be God!”

Taunted by the slow-witted dwarf, the lumbering monster breaks free of its chains and escapes its dungeon home. Now on the loose, the monster terrorizes the nearby village and subsequently murders a little girl. Cornered by its creator and a mob of angry, torch-carrying townspeople, the monster meets its fiery end at an old windmill.

Frankenstein Opens in New York City

Frankenstein opened at New York City’s Mayfair Theater on December 4, 1931. The movie made its official West Coast premiere on December 6, 1931, in Santa Barbara, California, with Colin Clive and Mae Clarke in attendance.

“James Whale…has wrought a stirring grand-guignol type of picture, one that aroused so much excitement at the Mayfair yesterday that many in the audience laughed to cover their true feelings,” reported Mordaunt Hall of The New York Times (12/5/31).

“Looks like Dracula plus, touching a new peak in horror plays and handled in production with supreme craftsmanship…Appeal is candidly to the morbid side…” observed Variety (12/8/31).

Frankenstein Box Office, Trivia, DVD

• Frankenstein grossed a staggering $12 million at the American box office.
• Frankenstein and Dracula were re-released in 1938 and shown as a double feature. At one theater, packed with 4,000 restless fans, a riot nearly broke out when the show failed to start on time due to the late arrival of the prints.
• Frankenstein had a tough time with motion picture censor boards, both in the United States and abroad. The U.S. censors didn’t like Dr. Frankenstein’s pseudo-blasphemous “God” claim while U.K. censors objected to the monster’s murder of Dr. Waldman and its overt threats to bride-in-waiting Elizabeth.
• As per Carl Laemmle Sr.’s  orders, Boris Karloff in full Frankenstein makeup was never to be seen by his office staff. His reasoning: “Some of our nice little secretaries are pregnant and they might be frightened if they saw him.”
• Carl Laemmle Sr. viewed the rushes from Frankenstein and was horrified by what he saw. He then told his producer son that moviegoers must be warned, which led to Edward Van Sloan’s prologue/disclaimer as featured at the beginning.
• Bette Davis had auditioned for the part of Elizabeth, but James Whale deemed her “too aggressive.”
• Boris Karloff was invited to audition for the role of the monster after James Whale had spotted him in the Universal Pictures commissary. “Your face has startling possibilities…” he told the actor.
• One male moviegoer was so upset after viewing Frankenstein that he phoned the theater manager at 3 AM the next morning, telling the startled man: “I saw Frankenstein at your place last night and can’t sleep – I have no intention that you should either!”
• In its 1998 list of the “20 Scariest Movies,” TV Guide placed Frankenstein at #9.
• On DVD: Frankenstein 75th Anniversary Edition (Universal, 2006).

“The brain you stole, Fritz. Think of it. The brain of a dead man waiting to live again in a body I made with my own hands!” Colin Clive declares.

Far out…

H.P. Lovecraft is calling he wants his story back. I have to start out with saying “Subject Two” screams “Re-Animator” influence. It’s basically “Re-Animator” with more humanistic characters, and none of the style and humor. On top of this it also feels like a friendlier version of “Frankenstein’s Monster”, if the monster was kinda help-full and actually cared about Frankenstein himself. I felt while watching the film that it seemed like there were points that is was unnecessary for Dr. Vick to kill his assistant again, and again because of the fact that he seemed so willing to be help-full anyway.  In the end I did enjoy the film enough to be able to watch it all of the way through.

With the techniqual aspics of the film, you can tell it was done at more of an amature level. One reason being continueity errors like in the scene where Adam goes to kill the random hunter that shot him, the gun in his hand switched from right to left and back. Another involves the fact that there should be a balance to how a scene is cut, like if a person is talking and the shot shows his/her head on one side, when we cut to the other person they are talking to, the other person should be on the other side of the screen.

Well over all I did enjoy the film, and it did have a little charm to it, it may have been because it took from “Re-Animator”, and “Frankenstein’s Monster”, both being great classics. I give “Subject Two” a 5.5 out of 10.

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

“Victor Juliet’s Director’s Cut” is a 100% Guerrilla style Horror film. It’s actually almost a parody of itself, and a parody of how many Indie Guerrilla style horror directors really are. In fact that’s where it’s charm comes from. It does have an original concept, which gets kudos in my opinion. It starts off with a scene in a movie, then goes to a documentary style set up, and from there takes you on a path that Victor Juliet himself seems to have made. Another great thing about this film is that it even ends with a note of a possible sequel, and or spin off. I warn you now that this film isn’t for everyone. If you enjoy a film that makes fun of itself, others, with cheesy dialogue, and just as cheesy effects, then I’d say check it out!

Over all I give “Victor Juliet’s Director’s Cut” a 7 out of 10. It gets bonus points for being Indie, and self aware.

Paranormal Activity is a psychological thriller. It isn’t necessarily the type of film that would scare you while watching it, but at the screening I went to see many people were jumping and screaming in there seats, heck I even jumped once. A lot of people are saying it isn’t a scary movie, and I do understand what they are saying, but in my opinion I’d beg the differ. This being a psychological film, it can have a similar effect on people that The Exorcist had on many Catholics. While watching the movie you may not be scared but later on when you’re alone home, you might thing that the sound of your house settling, may not be your house settling. At least that’s just my opinion on how the film works. You watch it and it lingers with you later on when you decide to go to sleep, almost taking you back to a childhood when you were afraid of the boogieman.

My final review of the film is I give it an 8 out of 10. The film keeps you on your seat, the whole time, and it really does linger with you later. So if you’re a fan of Ghost Hunters and anything of that sort, go and see Paranormal Activity, I believe you’d really enjoy it.

Well the first thing I do want to say about the Saw series is that before I picked up the five movie pack, I had only seen the first two movies, when they were in theaters. Since its been so long, I should have expected that I could remembered things wrong, and end up being wrong on a couple complaints I had about it. Okay, well I suppose I should tell you what these complaints were. My biggest complaint I had was that in Saw 2 they completely ignored the whole concept of why they called him Saw in the first place. Well I have to say that I stand corrected on this one. Watching it again, it’s actually one of the first things that they do, I must have not noticed it while in the theater, the first time or something. The other was that the second one just wasn’t original enough to even compare with “Saw”. On this I have to say I may have been a little to critical, but it does suffer from sequel syndrome. In most cases with the first sequel of any movie has this issue, it’s a rare occasion where the sequel is as good or even better than the original. I never really had any complaints about the first Saw film. At the time it was original and new, and I still stand by that.

Well after the first two Saw movies, I didn’t watch any until now. So now I have finally seen all the Saw movies that are on DVD at this time. I’m going to rate them from one to ten. One being a waste of time and money, five being an average movie, and ten being perfect. I will also give a 1 to 10 review on the collector’s set in total.

Saw had an original concept, it kept you questioning things, and the pacing was great. It kept up my enjoyment of the film, and kept my attention. I would have to give the film a 7.5 out of 10.

Saw II suffered from the sequel issue that most sequels suffer from. It’s not original anymore. The story to it wasn’t as good. The only characters you might be able to find any sympathy for are Daniel Matthews (Erik Knudsen), and Jonas (Glenn Plummer). Though personally my favorite character was Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg), even though he screwed up anyway. In the end I give this film a 5 out of 10. It was an average film, at least I didn’t walk out wanting my money back.

Saw III was undeniably better than it’s last predecessor. I really liked how it brought all of them together. That is one thing I like to see in a lot of films, is how some can interconnect. I also liked that they brought back Donnie Wahlberg in this. One thing I wasn’t happy with was how the first trap scene was done. That scene with the guy, with the chains connected to different parts of his body, the editing of that wasn’t very good. They had too much repeating of the same exact sound fx, and I believe the continuity wasn’t very good either on it. Other than that I really enjoyed it, I give it a 7 out of 10.

Saw IV was a film that didn’t make sense to do, but it worked. There isn’t much to say about this one, other than that I did like how they put this one together. I also liked how they brought in another person who was helping Jigsaw, it wasn’t perfect in how they did it, but it worked. I give this film a 6.5 out of 10.

Saw V was the last Saw film I’ve seen thus far. This one felt like they were running out of ideas, but it still worked… barely. Don’t get me wrong I did enjoy it, but I saw the ending coming, at this point it’s starting to feel a little repetitive. All in all I give Saw V a 5.5 out of 10.

In total for the 5 Disc UnRated Collector’s Set I give it a 6.5. It gets bonus points for commentaries, and some cool special features. Thus kicking up to a 7 or of 10 in total. Yeah I like special features, and commentaries. That it for now catch you guys later.

Colin looks at a zombie invasion from the point of view of a zombie, as the movie opens Colin has just been bitten and returning to the sanctuary of his home, is then attacked by his roommate Damien. Slowly Colin changes from fully functioning human being to shuffling zombie alone in his house. From there on Colin ventures out of the comfort of his four walls and heads out onto the street in search of something.

Colin is being described and raved about as the zombie movie with a heart, circling the character of Colin from human to zombie, to victim of the human race as he is repeatedly attacked, and miraculously manages to survive a series of assaults by the zombie hating (and understandably so) human race.

Director Price has had an incredibly good year off the back of his project; his movie has screened at Cannes, Frightfest, and now enjoys selected cinema and consecutive DVD release (in the UK). The reviews of Price’s movie have been phenomenal, everyone stating the guy is a genius.  But like the grim reaper, I’m going to have to put a stop to this…

There is a certain politeness with British people, I’m guilty of it myself at times, and this is to praise things that run against the odds. In a normal world Colin might just have got to Frightfest before vanishing into obscurity, however we have embraced this low budget offering and given it high praise, not because of what it is, but because of what it has achieved. Not only did Price manage to make the movie, he secured make up and make up artists from the last X-men movie, then he got it seen; and congratulations on Price, however the simple fact is that Colin is not a good movie.

I should add before I start that I’m sure that Price has created something better than I could have manage, and again I commend him. However I certainly would have put more dialogue and story into the movie. Colin suffers from severe lacks in understand ability, its not just that didn’t get it, its that the director shifts of course and picks up side projects or storylines if you prefer that seem at times almost bunged in to fill a commitment of running time. The actors if actors is the right word often just seem to go of and do there own thing, I’m talking of the zombie cast here I should add, whom just wonder about making noises and sometimes inventing there own depictions of how a zombie would behalf; the worst example being at a house siege where a long haired zombie behaves like none of the other zombies. But it goes beyond the acting; lots of scenes literally seem jumbled together. So my first real criticism I guess is that like any workplace, if you have lots of people you need to be able to control them.

When working on the heart aspect of Colin you are confronted with the family of Colin who try to tame him, or revert him back to his human self. The whole process of this is incredibly long and dragged out almost in an arty way, but failing miserably. When the inevitable happens and Colin cant be tamed of his victim the only thought that came to mind was “couldn’t they have dressed her in a better outfit?” And more annoyingly no sooner has this aspect of the story been picked up, than its been discarded leaving me wondering what happed to the victim, and what happened to the rest of the family, and more so the awful looking woman who plays Colin’s mother, who looks nothing like her children, and has zero acting skill.

The biggest issues are lighting and boredom, Price used a camcorder to make the movie and I’m guessing that dark scenes never quite worked right and what Price has done (I’m assuming) has shot scenes in daylight, or low light and then added the effect of darkness, creating this ugly looking hue onscreen. The dark seems are almost at times unwatchable. But the worst aspect of all is boredom; I was bored rigid as scenes that could have been told in seconds were dragged out into minutes, sometimes-great numbers of minutes. Who really wants to see the same zombie slowly shuffling down a corridor for several minutes? Who wants to see family scenes literally dragged out without you really knowing them or what they are about? My biggest piece of advice being if your going to create meaningful scenes, then give them meaning.

Yes Price has been very clever to construct this movie, however please stop praising him for something that is really not that great, because in doing so you creating another potential ego for someone who has achieved only one thing, to create a gathering of people, because for the things that Colin is, one thing its not a movie, let alone a good one!

Nosferatu (Nosferatu: Eine Syphonie Das Grauens) (1922)

Where better to begin than with one of the oldest surviving horror films. Nearly lost on its inception after failing to get permission from Bram Stoker’s estate for adapting his infamous novel “Dracula” for the screen, it only survived through a handful of prints, but thank god it did! Though it’s over 90 years old, it’s still gloriously eerie, with dance-like performances and striking expressionist stylings, full of peaked arches and long shadows. Though it’s been copied, lampooned and adapted numerous times, there’s still no other film which captures its unsettling otherworldliness.

The full film

Still, if Nosferatu is your idea of horror, you might like Herner Werzog’s weirdly romantic 1979 remake, or for another true expressionist classic, try the inimitably eerie “Cabinet of Doctor Caligari” (1919), the first true horror film.

Jacob’s Ladder (1990)

Though not strictly a horror film, this strange allegorical thriller is deeply unnerving. It follows the disturbing experiences of a Vietnam veteran as a squadron of demonic beings begin hounding him. Are they real? Is Jacob going mad? Or are they the result of some sinister military experiments enacted on his platoon in ‘Nam? Though the truth turns out to be both surprising and satisfying, it’s the surreal hallucinatory sequences that really sell this. From an unsettlingly satanic seduction in a party to a genuinely horrific descent into a hellish hospital, it’s spattered with unforgettable sequences that’ll have you shuddering.

The trailer for the film which hints at some of the creepier scenes

Again, there’s no film quite like this, though a similar central theme (which I can’t go into without spoiling the plot twist) isn’t unusual, films that combine the theme, or even similarly surprising twists, with such arresting visuals are rare. However, for slick direction and a sense of dread, try “Don’t Look Now” (1972) or the spooky 1962 classic “Carnival of Souls”.

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

This was the film that turned the zombie from a lumbering creature of voodoo legend into the slathering, hording monster we think of today, whether that’s a good thing or not, though notably the “z” word is never used in the film and the creatures are, more correctly, referred to as “ghouls”. The build up of tension is masterful, from that first staggering figure and the classic sing-song cry of “they’re coming to get you Barbara” to the tense and claustrophobic finale, there’s plenty to keep you on edge, with some nasty moments in between (who can forget the murderous little girl and that ear-shattering musical shriek?). But if all that wasn’t enough to leave you tossing and turning at night, there’s the horrible racial tension subtext, with the very likeable black lead taking control of the situation but doomed beyond his survival skills.

The full film (like Nosferatu it’s currently in the public domain)

Unlike the last few films there are quite a few which followed this influential film’s lead. The second in the “of the dead” saga, “Dawn of the Dead” (1978) adds an impish critique of consumerism to the mix, both funny and unsettling in equal measure. Or for another indie film, on an even smaller budget (an incredible £45!) try 2008’s “Colin”.

The Wicker Man (1973)

Another tense thriller (which like Nosferatu and Night of the Living Dead spawned a totally unnecessary remake) with an almost unbearable build up of tension, this sees a slightly bigoted policeman travels to a remote island to investigate the apparent disappearance of a young girl. What he discovers is cheerful pagan community ruled by Lord Summerisle, a mesmerising performance from genre legend Christopher Lee. The subtle, incredibly slow shift in tone, making the pagans turn from rather sweet children of nature to an incredibly sinister costumed army, by which point the tension is actually painful.

The trailer gives the imagery but not the tautness of the finished product

Arch-playwright Anthony Schaffer, who wrote the screenplay, knows a thing or two about thrillers. For a lighter but equally distressing adaptation of his, 1974’s desperately witty “Sleuth” is fabulous. For those who prefer to be scared Roman Polanski’s “Rosemary’s Baby” (1968) has a similarly unbearable build up, turning the fussy old lady next door into a Satanist at the heart of a horrifying conspiracy. Eek!

The Orphanage (el Orfanto) (2007)

This fine film from fantasy maestro Guillermo del Toro proves that the traditional ghost story can still be perfectly terrifying. A woman moves into the disused orphanage she grew up in, planning to reopen it, with her imaginative adoptive son claims to have found a new invisible friend. But when he vanishes during a party, a frightening tale of deformity, mistreatment and murder unfolds. With expert use of music, sound and visual effects, arresting images and, in some cases, lack of images, this is a modern day ghost story with just the right mix of gothic archaism and modern technology. The result is genuinely frightening, and despite a heart-warming finale, it’ll still be with you hours later.

The very creepy trailer

The ghost story has made quite a comeback recently. 2001’s “The Others” had a really creepy tone despite a slightly obvious twist, while del Toro’s 2001 piece “The Devil’s Backbone (el Edpinazo del Diablo)” covered some similar ground with some beautiful and very unsettling visual effects.

Hellraiser (1987)

Although its success turned it into a lamentable franchise, the original Hellraiser remains a deeply unsettling and unsettlingly deep film. Combining vicious gore and really nasty-looking makeup with a disturbing tone, the film concerns a magic puzzle-box which opens a portal to a visceral hell. When the adulterous Julia discovers that her brother-in-law and former lover has fallen foul of the beings that live beyond the portal, she is more than happy to murder in order to revive him, and only her perceptive stepdaughter can stand in her way. Raising uncomfortable issues about love and lust, and oozing with overtones of sadomasochism, what’s most frightening about the film is the feelings it instils in the viewer, that uneasy, somewhat guilty, allure. Since it’s release the otherworldly Cenobites, particularly the lead cenobite dubbed “Pinhead”, have become icons and it’s easy to see why: with their strange intonation and archaic dialogue, their ghastly yet priestly appearance, and their obsession with the flesh, they’re the very image of perverse pleasure.

Trailblazer for Hellraiser (sorry couldn’t resist)

Though the franchise soon fell into silliness, the second film “Hellraiser 2: Hellbound” (1988) retains the key central themes that made the first film so arresting, even if the climax is a bit of a stretch of the suspension of disbelief.

Silence of the Lambs (1991)

This classic psychological thriller brought horror into the A-list. Though Anthony Hopkins is memorable as the essential sociopath, it’s Ted Levine’s unhinged Buffalo Bill that really terrifies. What gives his character real bite is knowing that all his ghastly activities are inspired by real life murderer Ed Gein, a killer who made clothing and furniture out of his victims and exhumed corpses in what some have described as a sort of shamanic transvestism. Hopkins’ cannibal capers and creepy hissing are nothing by comparison.

A suitably slick trailer for the film

Like every good slightly-scary flick since the seventies, this spawned a spate of sequels and prequels, of which “Red Dragon” (2002) is probably the most effective. If you like your thrillers unnerving and slick with gore, 1995’s “Se7en” has a neat twist and some horrific deaths that give “Saw” a run for its money. Or if you like gore and thrills mixed with some biting satire, “American Psycho” (2000) might be to your tastes.

Alien (1979)

We’ve had tense thrillers, we’ve had haunted houses, we’ve had arty visuals, nifty effects and films that make one think of one’s sexuality and gender in a way one would rather not, but what would happen if you combined the lot and thrust it into deep space in a grungy-looking space ship? Well, you’d get a horrible mess, but you might get something close to “Alien”. Sumptuous direction, beautiful biomechanical designs by the wonderful H R Giger, fantastic acting, atmospheric music and some ghastly effects makeup: this is a film that has everything. Critics have often referred to it as “the haunted house in space” and it’s certainly shot like a ghost story; only the tiniest glimpses of the alien itself are seen, giving us just enough to be afraid but never too much to reveal its true strength, or indeed reveal the limitations of the effects.

The tense trailer for the film, complete with dark claustrophobic settings and evil cat

Yes, this is another that spawned some really awful sequels. “Aliens” (1986) is not a bad film by any means, but if, like me, you prefer the dread of a single monster picking off its victims to out-and-out warfare, you will prefer the original. In terms of deep space claustrophobia, the only film that, for me, comes close is the HAL section in “2001: A Space Odyssey” (1968); the pale, high-contrast lighting is strikingly similar to the stasis pod room on board the Nostromo too.

Ju-On: the Grudge (2002)

It’s no secret that I’m very keen on the creepy psychological horror that populates Asian horror, and for me, the most terrifying instalment of the J-horror invasion was Ju-On”. It tells the strange tale of a house haunted by the horror of a double murder; two ghosts furiously hound any person that enters their house. The combination of a simple bu“t only partially explained story, low-budget but grossly unsettling effects, which can be as simple as a dark smudge or a little boy wearing a lot of face-paint, and freakish sound effects is one that leaves me unable to sleep after even thinking of the film. Like Hellraiser, part of the fear comes with the idea that one could be damned simply through accident or curiosity: with Hellraiser, it was toying with the puzzle-box; in Ju-On it’s stepping inside the cursed house. How would you know any building doesn’t carry the same curse? The imagery, however low-rent, is outstanding, from the long-haired shadow leaning over a sleeping grandmother, to the climatic shock of the ghost Kayako in all her gory glory, crawling down the stairs uttering her ghastly death-rattle, this is truly disturbing stuff.

A rather unnerving Japanese trailer for the film which nicely summarises some of the most effective images

Ju-On is not the only great J-horror style film to be found. 1998’s seminal “Ringu” is equally unsettling and is now notorious for it’s climactic sequence in which the yurei (a long haired, white garbed creature which is a staple of Japanese folklore and common in many films of this type) known as Sadako creeps out of a television set. Watch it on cheaply copied video if you dare! Also worth a look is “Dark Water (Honogurai mizu no soko kara)” (2002) which swaps the yurei’s usual white dress for a yellow anorak and a cute lunchbox, and gives the legend a tragic but very feminine spin. Finally, there’s “The Eye (Gin Gwai)” (also 2002) a Chinese film that combines a “Sixth Sense” style idea with a “Gary Gilmore’s eyes” one, peppered with eerie, partially seen shapes and dark revelations. If you like the style of these films but don’t like reading subtitles, all five films mentioned in this section have been remade for American audiences in bigger budget but less satisfying ventures.

The Shining (1980)

Here we are at the summit of our list: possibly the most frightening, disturbing and down-right creepy movie ever made. Combining Stephen King’s nose for spooky set-ups (and Indian burial grounds) and Stanley Kubrick’s directing genius, along with dashes of elegant special effects, jarring and unsettling music, and convincing acting, the result is as beautiful and technically brilliant as it is frightening. Employed as an out-of-season caretaker for a remote hotel, wannabe writer Jack Torrence hopes his wife and son will enjoy the peace and quiet of a few months in the snow. But with gifted youngster Danny seeing ghosts and hearing warnings, and Jack becoming increasingly unstable, the Overlook Hotel is anything but peaceful. The film is nothing if not masterful; tension builds to satisfying reveals, while little Danny’s horrific visions are memorable and alarming. It leaves so many images etched into the mind: the two little girls who want to play “forever and ever and ever”, “Red rum” written in lipstick on a door, the torrents of blood that fill the lobby, and of course Jack Nicholson heaving his way though a door with a fire-axe. But it’s the ambiguity that makes the film so unsettling. Is Jack simply mad? What does the photograph at the end mean? Why do Wendy and Danny see some of the same horrors as Jack? It’s left as a mystery, allowing the viewer to draw their own conclusions, and fill the gaps with whatever deep seated fears they hold.

The trailer. Making me one of the only people on the internet not to use the door scene.

There is, of course, no film quite like it, but the creepy surrealism has, for me at least, some considerable similarities with the work of David Lynch. Kubrick’s incredible versatility means that even his own films are nothing like “the Shining”, though each is a classic in its own field.

So, I hope you enjoyed these tales of terror, and please, don’t have nightmares!

New Aussie horror The Dying Breed opens in a rather lengthy way, delivering an insight into four characters without really giving you a shred of information. Geared firmly at the character of Nina who has lots of meaningful moments, flashbacks and visions of events that occurred to her sister in a rural location sometime earlier. The movies characters all have headed to a strange backwater in search of the site of the mysterious Tasmanian Tiger, something that is as great a myth as Bigfoot.  While Nina acts all weird and deep, the others all seem to share a mutual dislike for each other forming two parties. But as they feud, they all miss completely the tensions that surround them.

My opening paragraph may seem a little confused, but to be honest with you it all is pretty much, there are little explanations given as to why people are how they are, or why they behave the way they do; its all done in that way where the movies creators have tried to be on a higher intellectual plain than us mere mortals. The truth of the matter is, despite their best efforts its not very deep at all.

Now saying this, The Dying Breed is not a bad film, because what it does do is gather a couple of menacing factors and sticks them together. First up you have the issue of the Tasmanian Tiger, a creature that lives in isolation and is only rumored to exist, rumour suggests that the only reason its never been seen is because those that see it are eaten, and logic would tell you that such an illusive animal would be a little on the protective side to protect its lifestyle. The second and far more troubling is that back in the days of Australia being a prison one of the convicts known as Alexander The Pieman escaped and somehow managed to survive for a rather long time, well long enough to create some descendants, clue to his habits revolve around his nickname.

What you have in The Dying Breed is a good old-fashioned tale of Deliverance style locals and the wonder of cannibalism. The result of which, despite the producers best efforts to make the characters rather unlikeable; is quite a gross out movie offering filled with blood, gore and sometimes worse. Its all actually quite disturbing territory that harks back to the 1980’s video nasty era.

The punches are the basis of the movies success, because from the moment you enter the second half of the movie your transported into a variety of horrifically unpleasant circumstances, and disturbing visuals. Punch, punch, punch! Once the movie gets going its fairly relentless, characters are dispatched in continuously worse methods as it becomes apparent that the locals are clearly the descendants of The Pieman, and that Nina’s sister undoubtedly had some sort of nasty encounter with these locals.

The clear difference with this movie is that it packs two very big final punches one of which leads you to a false ending. And if that were not enough the text that appears onscreen just before the credits roll lead you on a wild and furious search online, because the story ends in such a way to make you wonder if the film could in fact be based on some true facts. And quite disturbingly, potentially it is.

Its grubby looking, broody, its empty on the character building front, but its actually pretty good entertaining viewing. And the sort of thing that keeps you thinking long after the credits roll. If nothing else it will give you some visuals to haunt your mind.

Image via Wikipedia