The Friday Night Horror Movie: The Strangers: Chapter 1 (2024)

image host

This film has been popping up in my feeds and the like for a while now. A brief preview of some of my friends’ Letterboxd reviews noted it to be pretty dumb but enjoyable; also, there is a sequel in theaters now, and I’m trying to watch as many movies from 2025 as i can this month, so I pressed “play.”

I should have taken a nap. Or rewatched one of the Halloween movies for the umpteenth time. Or smashed my thumb with a hammer. Any of those would have been more enjoyable than this movie.

Maya (Madelaine Petsch) and her boyfriend Ryan (Froy Gutierrez) are in the midst of a cross-country drive that will end in Portland, where Maya has a job interview. Because nothing makes you more refreshed and ready for an all-important interview like being stuck in a car for days on end.

Ryan says he’s hungry, and Maya looks at the map on her phone, spies a little diner, and tells him to exit now. I submit it is possible that there are people in this world who, while in the midst of a multi-day drive across the country, simply whip out their phones when they are hungry and choose the very first restaurant they see without looking at a menu or reading reviews on Yelp, but that was my first red flag that this movie was playing it fast and loose with plot details.

The cafe is in a tiny little town in Oregon. It is far enough off the highway that they lose their cell phone signal, but big enough, apparently, to have a good signal inside of town. Except, they actually note how big the town is, and it only has, like, 350 people. Like an old-fashioned movie, everybody in the surprisingly full cafe stops what they are doing and stares at the newcomers.

They are all shocked – shocked I tell you – that she wants a vegetarian plate. They are even more shocked when they realize our heroes are celebrating their five year anniversary – but not of marriage, just dating. Apparently the citizens of this small town are very conservative. Not that any of this seems to matter to the actual plot, it’s just a chance for the film to add a little atmosphere.

Lunch over, they head to their car and find that it doesn’t start. A creepy mechanic appears out of nowhere (the film will do this a lot – hide somebody skulking around from the audience’s point of view and pretend the characters somehow wouldn’t notice a person walking right up to them and staring.) He says they’ll have to order some parts, and our heroes will have to spend the night. Luckily, there is a really nice cabin in the woods that gets “rented on the internet.”

At the cabin they sit outide and they enjoy the quiet of the woods. Then they start a little sexy time. Ryan lifts her up and takes her to…not the bedroom, but the kitchen. Because where else do you go for a little sexy time in a stranger’s house but their kitchen counters?

The doorbell interrupts their fun, and some creepy girl stands outside awkwardly. Everyone stares at each other for some ridiculously long beats, and then she asks if someone or the other is home. Ryan gives her a harsh “no” while Maya indicates she must have the wrong house. Then they stare at each other in silence for a while. It s so awkward and weird this scene. Any normal person would assume that maybe the guy who owns the place has a daughter who plays with this young girl. Any normal person would explain that they are renting the place for the night.

Girl leaves, and our heroes get their sexy time (on the couch, not the bed, because there will be a “spooky” reveal in the bedroom later). And then, oops, our heroes realize they accidentally left his asthma inhaler in the car. Because what normal people would definitely do when they are leaving their car for the night in an old auto shop miles away from where they will be spending the night with no modes of transportation is not make sure they have a life saving medical device. And it wasn’t knocked under the seat. It was sitting right there in the console.

So Ryan gets on a motorcycle that is for some reason left on the property with the keys and rides back to town. He gets the inhaler and then some food (ordering her a cheeseburger without the met – so just bread and cheese, I guess). While he’s gone, she drinks three small bottles of hard liquor and a bottle of beer.

She also calls the owner of the place because the refrigerator is out and essentially demands that he send someone that night to fix it. Despite the fact that the only thing they have to keep cool is a six pack of beer, they will be leaving in the morning. The fridge will not come into play for the rest of the movie. Not even when the evildoers start showing up and knocking on the door. It would have been an easy jump scare for our heroes to think the person at the door was a refrigerator repairman only to find out it was someone with nefarious intent. But whatever.

The creepy girl knocks on the door again while Ryan is out. Maya doesn’t open the door but is pretty freaked out by it. So what does she do in this frightened state inside a strange cabin in the woods while her boyfriend is away? She smokes a blunt, then takes a shower. That’s what everybody would do, right?

The thing is, while Maya has been alone in the cabin, we have seen the creeps staring at her from inside and outside the house. Maya plays some music on a piano, and one of them sits on a chair behind her. When she takes a shower, someone comes inside the bathroom and watches. They would surely make some noise moving around like that. Unless she’s completely oblivious, she would surely see them.

Whatever, horror movie tropes and all that. Eventually, Ryan comes home, and the creeps attack for good. More stupid decisions are made, including never calling the cops and not just high-tailing it out of there. At one point Ryan has a shotgun and the killers only have blades, but he still tells Maya to go run through the woods while he stays there. And doesn’t shoot them.

I’ve rattled on for too long. I just couldn’t believe how dumb this film was. I expect characters to make stupid decisions in horror films because otherwise the film would be over in ten minutes, but the characters in this film never make even one sensible decision.

It ends with a “To Be Continued” and while I hated this film, I kind of want to see the sequel (there will be a third one, too). Also, apparently, this is an attempt to reboot a Strangers franchise. The original The Strangers was made in 2005 and a sequel came out in 2018. I might have to watch them all as punishment for my sins.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Five Night’s At Freddy’s 2 (2025)

five nights at freddys

My daughter is a big fan of the Five Nights at Freddy’s video games, and all their supplemental material, including the movies. Her mother took her and some friends to see the first movie on opening night in the theater. She loved it, and when it came to streaming, she made me watch it with her. I remember absolutely nothing about the movie. I gave it three stars on Letterboxd but I suspect at least half a star was due to her excitement over watching it again. Exuberance is catching.

She has been super excited over the sequel for weeks now, and she talked me into buying her and three friends tickets to it for opening night tonight. They are old enough to go to the theater alone now, so the wife and I were looking forward to a quiet night at home.

Unfortunately, one of the friends got sick, and not being ones to let good money go to waste, the wife and I drew straws to see who would take the now empty seat. I drew the short straw. You would think that if my daughter’s excitement encouraged me to enjoy the last movie while watching it by ourselves at home, then a packed theater full of excited fans would make this viewing even more enjoyable. You would be wrong. The reasons for this are twofold:

It has been a long week, and I was tired. I was in no mood to go to the theater and watch a movie I wasn’t really interested in.
Those excited fans were all teenagers.

The two boys sitting next to me (I’d put their age at 15) talked through the entire movie. I hate when people talk during movies.But then I realized my daughter’s friends were also talking through parts of the film and excitedly pointing at the screen when someone happened that they recognized from the games. I listened to the boys talk, and they two were just excited to be there, and were having a good time, So why shouldn’t I enjoy myself?

The movie isn’t good. I’ve never played the game, but I can see the appeal of wandering around an old, dark, abandoned amusement palace where animatronic robots jump out and try to kill you. But that doesn’t translate very well to the movies. Especially when the movie attempts to build things like character and story into the murdering robot movie.

Mike Schmidt (Josh Hutcherson) seems to have recovered from the events of the first movie (which happened a year ago) and more or less has his stuff together. His daughter Abby (Piper Rubio) misses the friends she made back then (and remember, her friends were actually the ghosts of five murdered children inhabiting those animatronic robots). Vanessa (Elizabeth Lail) also returns from the first movie, but she’s still haunted by the past.

The story of what happened on those five nights one year ago has become something of a legend in town. People love the stories and, in fact, are planning an anniversary party of sorts where they will all dress up as the robots and have a carnival.

There is also a science fair about to happen, and Abby is working on a robot submission (when that fails, guess what robot will come to her aid?). Apparently the school of this small town is cool enough to have an entire robotics department. It is led by a vicious and mean teacher (played to perfection by Wayne Knight) who will surely get his comeuppance.

Matthew Lillard returns in flashbacks and Skeet Ulrich shows up at one point making it a mini-Scream reunion.

Yada, yada, yada, there is some lore building (and no doubt plenty of references to the games I haven’t played). Abby is getting a spirit called from some other dead girl who needs her to come to the original Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza to help the animatronic robots flee the restaurant and wreak havoc on the town.

There are a few decent jump scares, and the scenes in the pizzeria have a certain eeriness to them, but mostly the film is just dumb. I suspect a lot of that is the translation from game to screen. Things that work well when you are playing a game are pretty idiotic when watching it happen in a movie.

For example, the original Freddy’s has some kind of fake river flowing through it. It is maybe three feet deep, and the walls surrounding it go up another foot or two. It would not be a difficult thing to climb out of. Twice characters fall into it and can’t get out of it. Another time a character has to log into a computer and try and shut down the Wi-Fi signal (which is what controls the robots). We see a lot of screenshots with him clicking through boxes. Both of these things seem very much like something you’d deal with effectively in a game, but on screen…boring.

But the girls had fun, and sometimes that’s all that matters.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Heart Eyes (2025)

heart eyes

I was about halfway through Heart Eyes before I realized that it was directed by the same guy who made Werewolves Within (2021), Josh Ruben. I quite liked that movie. It was smart and funny and clever about the way it played with its genre. Heart Eyes isn’t nearly as clever, and it winks a little too hard at the audience, like it is constantly letting the audience know that it knows it’s just a movie.

The genre it’s playing with is the slasher genre, and that’s a genre that’s had more than its fair share of meta commentary. The Scream films have pretty well bled that well dry. I’m being a little too harsh; there are parts of Heart Eyes that I really enjoyed, and the parts I didn’t like as much were still well made and entertaining.

A serial killer has been terrorizing lovers across the United States every Valentine’s Day for the last several years. This year he’s moved to Seattle, where we find our heroes Ally McCabe (Olivia Holt) and Jay Simmons (Mason Gooding.) She works in advertising and has just completed a campaign for a jewelry company where she spoofs the lives and bloody deaths of various doomed couples like Bonnie and Clyde. The boss lady previously approved it but now hates it because she feels it is in bad taste considering the Heart Eyes Killer has come to their town. She hires Jay to come in and fix things.

They go to dinner to talk about the new campaign. Things don’t go well, he leaves, and she chases him down to apologize. Outside she sees her ex-boyfriend with a new girl. In an attempt to make him jealous, Ally gives Jay a big kiss on the lips. The Heart Eyes Killer sees this, thinks they are true lovers, and spends the rest of the movie trying to kill them.

There are some very funny moments when the two of them try to convince the killer that they aren’t in love and that he should go kill someone else. Eventually Jordana Brewster shows up as a detective trying to solve the murders. When a ring shows up at one of the crime scenes with the initials JS on it, she starts to think Jay Simmons just might be her man.

I won’t spoil it, but fairly early on it is easy to figure out who really might be involved.

One of the difficulties of a film like this for me is that the slasher genre has been done to death. There aren’t really any more clever ways to kill a person. Heart Eyes tries, even in its own knowing way, but never does anything all that clever or interesting. There is a nice set piece set inside a drive-in theater that is both funny and exciting.

The film also has that super slick look that so many modern horror films have. Cameras have become so cheap and so good at their jobs that you don’t necessarily need the tech and the lighting you once needed. That’s not a bad thing, but sometimes modern horror films wind up a little too glossy for my tastes.

But overall this is a perfectly enjoyable film, and I’m very much looking forward to watching what Josh Ruben makes next.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Frankenstein (2025)

frankenstein

I don’t believe I’ve ever read Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, but I have seen several different cinematic adaptations of it. I’ve seen the 1931 film with Boris Karloff, of course, and all the sequels from Universal. I’ve seen several of the Hammer Studio versions and that one from the 1990s with Robert DeNiro. I guess it is safe to say I like the story, or perhaps I just like the monster.

Guillermo del Toro is a director whom I like but don’t really love. He’s an incredibly creative creator, and his films have an amazing visual style, but his stories rarely do it for me.

I don’t know why I tell you these things except that I guess when a beloved director takes on a beloved story, it feels like I should begin by expressing my feelings toward both things before I tackle how I feel about their collaboration.

For del Toro’s part, he’s apparently loved the story for decades and dreamed of making his own adaptation of it. I am reminded of Martin Scorsese’s The Gangs of New York, which was likewise a film the director had wanted to make for decades, yet when he finally got to do it, the film was compromised and became far less than his greatest film and presumably fell far from his aspirations. I don’t know if del Toro’s film was compromised by Netflix or anyone else, but the end result is overlong and overstuffed, and if it were to be given a subtitle like the novel, it might go something like this: Frankenstein; or, Be Careful What You Wish For.

The good news is the film looks absolutely amazing, even via streaming. Del Toro’s visual sensibilities have never been stronger. Frankenstein’s castle is a maze of gothic sensibilities and steampunk technology. The exteriors exist with beautiful mountain-strewn landscapes that made me want to grab my passport and head for the mountains of Eastern Europe. The acting is good across the board, especially Oscar Isaac as Victor Frankenstein and Jacob Elordi as the monster. And I always love to see Mia Goth in anything.

The problem, then, lies in the story. As I mentioned, I have not read the book, so I have no idea if this version is more faithful than the films I’ve seen, or less. It begins with a prelude. On an ice strewn sea somewhere, a ship full of Russian sailors is desperately trying to break through the ice and make it to the North Pole. They hear a noise and see flames rise somewhere toward the horizon. They run in that direction and find Victor Frankenstein badly wounded, near death.

Then the monster comes. It is fierce and dangerous and apparently impervious to bullets. It kills many men and screams Victor’s name. The sailors manage to get Victor aboard the ship and blow up the ice around the monster, sinking him into the frozen abyss.

Victor then tells the captain his tale, which makes up Part 1 of the film. It is more or less the story we all know. We do get a little more backstory on Victor. We see him as a child being taught by a demanding father (a wonderful Charles Dance) and being doted on by his mother. Then one by one her parents die, and he becomes estranged from his brother.

He becomes a doctor with wild ideas about life and death and is shunned by the community. He meets Henrich Harlande (Christoph Waltz), who is intrigued by his ideas. He gives him all the funding and supplies he needs and sets him up in an isolated castle.

He makes the monster but is disappointed when he doesn’t seem intelligent. The estranged brother comes back, and with him his fiancée, Lady Elizabeth Harlander (Mia Goth,) whom Victor falls in love with. It is Elizabeth that sparks the humanity inside the monster. Still, Victor tries to destroy him.

Part II picks up from there and tells the monster’s side of the story. He survives Victor’s murder attempt and flees to the forest. There he is taken in by a kindly, blind, old man (David Bradley) and learns to read and about friendship. Eventually he must leave, for he knows he cannot die, and he desires a companion. A companion only Victor Frankenstein can create. Slowly we’ll be brought back around to the prelude, and finally the film’s end.

It isn’t that the story is bad, but perhaps that it has been told too many times before, so it can no longer be made interesting. Del Tor does try. He keeps some things familiar but adds many other things, and even the familiar ones he plays with. But at 2 and a half hours, it is far too long and has far too many parts that just drag.

One wonders if del Toro is too big of a name now that no one was willing to tell him “no.” With pet projects like this, sometimes that’s exactly what you need. It is well worth watching for the acting and the stunning visuals. I just wish the story they are telling was more worthy of the artistry behind it.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Demon Knight (1995)

image host

When I was in college, I went to the movies pretty much every weekend. Sometimes two or three times. I saw absolutely everything that I had even the slightest amount of interest in. I probably did have interest in Demon Knight when it came out, as I liked horror comedies. But I honestly don’t remember. What I do remember is watching it in the theater and absolutely loving it.

Demon Knight is branded as a Tales From the Crypt story. Tales From the Crypt originated as an anthology horror comic in the 1950s and was hosted by the Crypt-Keeper, a wise-cracking corpse. It has been revised in various formats over the years, including an HBO series that lasted from 1989 to 1996. I’d never read any of those comics, and I don’t think I’d watched any of the HBO episodes, but the Crypt-Keeper would pop up in commercials and things, so I was definitely familiar with the brand.

Demon Knight was successful enough that they commissioned a sequel, Bordello of Blood, which came out a year later. I hated that film. So much so that it completely turned me off the whole Tales From the Crypt thing, and I never watched anything from them again. I never even came back to Demon Knight. So I haven’t seen it in 30 years.

It is one of those films I’d periodically think about, and I’d think I should revisit it, but for whatever reason I never did. It seems to be a movie that’s more or less been forgotten by the culture. I never see anyone talking about it. There are lots of other movies like this – some I did watch when they came out, some I didn’t – that get brought up periodically in online discussions. Those I usually seek out and watch again. But the lack of discussion about this one meant that anytime it would pop into my mind, it usually popped right back out again.

I cut the cord years and years ago. I own a lot of DVDs, but I do subscribe to various streaming services. I’m one of those people who subscribes to one service for a month or two, and then I’ll cancel it so I can subscribe to something else. I figure there is only so much stuff you can watch in any given month, so why spend all your money subscribing to every service?

A couple of months ago, Starz had one of those super deals where you could subscribe to an entire year for like $20. I’ve subscribed to Starz before and remembered it being okay, so I signed up. Tonight is the first time I’ve actually watched anything on their service since I subscribed. Most of the stuff they have is of no interest to me, and the stuff I am interested in I’ve already seen and own on DVD.

But while looking for a horror movie to watch, I found this and decided to finally give it another go. Actually, what I really did was watch The Mothman Prophesies on Starz, the Richard Gere flick from 2002, but it was so god-awful I decided I didn’t want to write about it for my Friday Night Horror Movie, and I dug around Starz some more and found this.

For the first ten minutes or so I wished I hadn’t. This was not what I was wanting; my fears that it would not live up to my memories were coming true. But then I was able to click my brain off. I was able to enjoy the film for what it was actually doing, not what I wanted it to do.

What it does is create an incredibly goofy, violent, goopy, and funny little horror story with lots of comedic elements and some pretty good practical effects. Billy Zane is having the time of his life, too.

Zane plays a demon called The Collector, who is after a guy named Frank Brayker (William Sadler). Brayker has a powerful artifact known as the key, which the demons need to take over the world, but which also contains some of Christ’s blood, which can kill the demons.

Brayker holes up in an old mission turned hotel, and the film becomes a base-under-siege story. Also in the hotel are an assortment of people, including the sassy owner (CCH Pounder), an old man (Dick Miller), an ex-con (Jada Pinkett Smith), an asshole (Thomas Haden Church), and others.

The film doesn’t do anything particularly new with the concept. There is lots of infighting, attempts to sneak away, and a traitor, but it does it with gusto and a real sense of fun. I remember when I first watched it, one of the joys was watching Thomas Haden Church play a character completely different from the good natured goof he played on the TV show Wings. Here he cusses, drinks, and has a prostitute attach battery clamps to his nipples!

The demon designs are good, and it is a real treat to see how many practical effects they used. CGI was just getting started at this point, and there is some use of it here, but mostly the demons are made of real stuff, and the gore is visceral (and the blood was made out of glow stick juice!).

This is a film that understands it isn’t going to win awards. The Oscars will not be calling. But it does what it does well and has a blast doing it. I had a lot of fun watching it, too.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Memoir of a Murderer (2017)

memoir of a murderer

My father has Alzheimer’s. It is early stages yet, so things are mostly okay. He sometimes forgets things that he’s just done, or other little details, but he always knows where he is and who I am. His father had it as well, and I watched Grandpa go through its entire course. It was awful. He often didn’t know who his wife or his children were. He’d forget where he was and what he was doing. He started hoarding money. It is an awful, awful disease.

As it turns out, it can also be a pretty good twist in a South Korean thriller.

Byeong-soo (Sul Kyung-gu) killed his father when he was a teenager. The father was a horrible man who often beat Byeong-soo and his sister. When the cops never came to get him, Byeong-soo began to believe the murder was justified. And then he began thinking maybe other murders would be justified. He became an avenging angel, murdering anyone he felt deserved it.

The years rolled by, and the bodies piled up. But then he had an accident, and it did something to him. Dementia came next, and a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s. He often has blackouts, and his memory is not so good. He stopsed killing and becomes a model citizen and loving father.

His daughter, Eun-hee (Kim Seol-hyun), knows nothing of his past. She cares for him and gives him a little microrecorder that he can use to record everything he does in a day. This, she thinks, will help his memory.

One day he gets into a fender bender with a man named Min Tae-joo (Kim Nam-gil). This causes Min Tae-joo’s trunk to pop open. There is something wrapped in plastic inside, and blood is dripping to the road. Min Tae-joo says it is a deer he hit earlier, but Byeong-soo recognizes human blood when he sees it and the cold look in Min Tae-joo’s eyes. This man, he knows, is a killer. More than that, he knows he must be the man who has been killing young women in his province. Three bodies have already shown up.

Ah, but Min Tae-joo also recognizes a killer when he sees one and decides to play a game. He discovers Byeong-soo has a daughter and begins to woo her. He sneaks into his house and reads his journal. Suddenly it is serial killer versus serial killer, except one of them can’t remember who he is half the time.

The film never really manages to rise above that pulp plot. The dementia angle adds some interesting twists. It creates a sort of unreliable narrator. The film is told through Byeong-soo’s point of view, so sometimes we’ll see something happen, and then he’ll question whether or not it was real, thus making us wonder the same thing. But it is also used a few too many times as a plot device. Beyong-soo will come close to killing Min Tae-joo, but then his eye will twitch (the film’s indication that he’s having an episode), and he’ll get away.

It mostly plays his Alzheimer’s as a plot device, as something to add an edge to the proceedings. We get a feel for how it affects Eun-hee, and there is a cop friend of Byeong-soo who reacts with astonishment whenever he either cannot remember him or he actually does. I can’t really complain that the film doesn’t spend a lot of time with the emotionality of dealing with that disease, as I’m not sure if I’d be able to take it. And it isn’t that it’s handled poorly here, but this is definitely not a feel about that disease and its effects on both those who have it and those that must take care of them.

Min Tae-joo is a fairly generic villain. He’s your typical basic cable serial killer. He is a cop in this one, so that’s interesting, except the film doesn’t really delve very deeply into that angle. Sul Kyung-gu is excellent as our anti-hero, and the film remains quite entertaining and thrilling. The final fight scene is well staged, and I mostly dug the entire film. But it’s never anything more than you expect.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Halloween (1978)

halloween poster

I don’t remember the first time I watched John Carpenter’s Halloween. I don’t think I saw it while in high school; it was probably college that found me first seeing it. Whenever it was, I’ve seen it many times since. It has become part of my DNA. I love it deep down in my bones. So I was surprised to realize that I’ve never actually written about it. I’ve written about several of the sequels and the remakes, but never the original. I’ve gotten into the habit over the last several years of watching one of the Halloween movies on Halloween, so I decided it was high time I watched the original on this, the spookiest of evenings, and then finally wrote something about it.

Reading some of my other Halloween reviews, I find that I’ve talked quite a lot about Carpenter’s film and its place in popular culture, so I don’t want to go too heavy in that direction here. Though it is often cited as the first slasher, you can actually go back as far as Psycho and Peeping Tom (both released in 1960) to find films that fit the mold. Italian giallos certainly had a lot of influence over the slasher genre and could even be considered slashers themselves. Technically Black Christmas, a very good slasher itself, was released a few years before Halloween. But it was Carpenter’s film that popularized the genre and solidified the tropes.

While this is true, I would argue that Friday the 13th (1980) truly solidified everything the slasher would become over the remaining decade. Sean S. Cunningham was clearly inspired by Halloween‘s success, and he distilled the Carpenter film down to its very essence. It has a group of sexy teens getting killed off one by one by a blade-wielding maniac. The final girl is virginal and thus pure in the film’s point of view. The killings all stem from something in the killers’ past. Etc. Even the title is taking the holiday premise from Carpenter. Friday the 13th takes the tropes established in Halloween and grinds them down, then exploits the hell out of them. The sex and nudity are more gratuitous, the violence more gore-filled.

Carpenter is on record stating that the notion that Laurie Strode survives Halloween due to her “purity” was purely accidental. And it’s true, Laurie isn’t some paragon of virtue. We see her smoking in one scene, and she doesn’t seem opposed to drinking or the fact that her friends are screwing their boyfriends at the drop of a hat. Her virginity seems to be more of a product of her own shyness and lack of confidence than any sense of morality. She is a “good girl” in the sense that she tries hard at school and genuinely seems to care about the kids she’s sitting with (unlike one of her friends who constantly yells at her charge and dumps her off at Laurie’s as soon as possible.)

Friday the 13th doubles down on the tropes. Its success led to many more slashers in the ensuing years, and most of them kept the distilled versions of these ideas and codified them.

It is always surprising to me how much Halloween takes its time getting to the killing. There is a murder in the opening flashback and then a long period of nothing. After a fantastic credit sequence (featuring a beautifully lit jack-o’-lantern and that iconic score), we open in 1963. A long POV shot shows us Michael Myers stabbing his sister to death (after she’s had some sexy fun times with her boyfriend). But the sex is off-screen, and the violence is fairly tame. Even the nudity feels not particularly gratuitous.

Then we move to the present day (1978) and find Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) for some reason driving to the asylum where Michael Myers is kept with a nurse in the middle of the night. Michael has escaped, attacks the nurse, and gets away. Dr. Loomis tracks him to his hometown of Haddonfield, IL. Loomis is our expositional bank. He keeps finding people to talk to about how Michael Myers isn’t human, he’s evil incarnate, he’s an unstoppable killing machine. Intercut with his hunt for Michael, we find Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) going to school and hanging out with her friends Annie (Nancy Loomis) and Lynda (PJ Soles.) They are typical teenagers. They smoke, they drive around town, and they talk about boys. Laurie gets teased because she cares about her grades and she’s shy around boys, but they genuinely seem to like each other.

In the background is Michael Myers. Standing tall, dressed in coveralls with that weird mask on, just stalking them. We’ll see him driving around, following Laurie. He’s standing outside her bedroom window or her classroom or down the road, but then he’ll quickly disappear. Because Loomis is constantly telling us about how evil Myers is, we feel that tension. Even when Laurie is doing something perfectly boring like making popcorn for the little boy she’s sitting, we know Michael is out there, just waiting to kill her.

The sequels will give Michael Myers a connection to Laurie. This will give him a reason to constantly be coming after her, but in this first film that connection hasn’t been made. His obsession with her is random, and all the more terrifying for it.

When the killings do come, they are fairly tame. There is very little bloodletting or gore. Michael does stab one guy so hard the knife pins him to a wall, and there is another scene in which a body is staged on a bed, and others fall out of closets, but they’d pass a TV edit these days.

But they work because they are so well staged by Carpenter. The way he sets them up and films them, the way he has spent the first 45 minutes setting up Michael Myers as this merciless killer, makes them incredibly effective. Dean Cundey’s cinematography is evocative. A lot of the scenes happen in darkness, but he finds a way to let just enough light in to shine across Michael’s face, or his victims as they flee in terror.

It isn’t a perfect film. There are times when it’s a very small-budget show. You can see some of the seems, but I don’t care. I just love every loving minute of it. It doesn’t get better than Halloween in terms of slashers.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Triangle (2009)

triangle movie poster

I don’t know how to write about this without spoiling a main plot point, so reader beware.

I love a good time loop movie. Groundhog Day wasn’t the first one of that type, but it perfected it and popularized it, and now it’s become a genre unto itself. Triangle takes the formula and gives it an interesting twist. Instead of our hero falling asleep and waking up to the same day over and over again (or getting killed and resetting to the beginning of the same day), she stays awake and in the same place while the other characters all die and then get reset and meet her again.

Six people take a sailboat out for a cruise. They mostly don’t know each other but are all connected to Greg (Michael Dorman), who owns the boat. Everybody is excited except Jess (Melissa George), who seems distracted and tired.

Things go well until they don’t. A sudden storm rolls in and capsizes the boat. All but one manage to climb on top of the wreckage. Soon they spot a cruise ship and hail it for help. They climb aboard but find it to be empty. Well, almost empty. They keep getting glimpses of someone, but that person seems to be hiding.

Jess gets increasingly paranoid. She keeps saying she’s been on this boat before. Then people start dying. Someone with a burlap sack over his head starts shooting people. Jess is the only one to survive. As she knocks the killer overboard, the killer says that they’ll be back and the only way to get home is to kill everybody.

Then a song plays over the radio, and Jess sees their capsized boat approaching. Except it isn’t empty; it is full of those original six people, including herself. Now here’s where the movie loses me a little. If it were me, I’d run up to my friends (and myself, I guess) and freak the frack out. I’d probably scare them at first, but I’d try to explain what just happened and let my friends try to figure things out. Jess does not do this. Instead she hides, then slinks around spying on the group. We’re treated to some of the same scenes we just watched but from different angles. She eventually tries to stop her friends from getting murdered. She does manage to change the timeline to varying degrees, but ultimately they all die again.

I know I put a spoiler heading at the top of this, but I don’t want to spoil everything, so I’ll have to let the plot lie right there. In some ways the script is very clever about letting things unfold, and in other ways it is rather stupid. Jess makes some ridiculously bad decisions for no other reason than to let the plot go in the direction the writers wanted it to.

It manages to conclude itself in a very unexpected and yet satisfying manner. It finds a way to do something completely different from all the other time loop movies I’ve seen, and I love that.

In the end I’d call it a good, but somewhat frustrating film, but one well worth watching.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)

nightmae on elm street

This is going to be a slight cheat. Obviously, I write a lot of movie reviews for Cinema Sentries. I do it for fun; I don’t get paid for it (I do get free Blu-rays, which is nice.) I’m not sure if I’d want to be in the cultural critic business right now; those folks are having a tough time of it. I’m also happy I don’t have anyone demanding I watch certain things. I review the things I request. I try to keep my requests down to a steady pace, but sometimes I go a little overboard, and I wind up with a stack of Blu-rays sitting on my desk, and that can be overwhelming.

That’s happening to me right now. I have a Blu-ray in front of me that I just watched but need to review. I’ve got another one I’ll hopefully watch later tonight. I have a six-film boxed set of Errol Flynn movies and another boxed set of all seven Nightmare on Elm Street movies.

That’s a lot of movies to watch and review. The Nightmare set is actually on the bottom of the pile, but since tonight is Friday and I always do a horror movie on Fridays, I thought I’d bump the first Nightmare on Elm Street up and kill two birds with one stone.

That also means I won’t be digging too deep into it because I’ll want to save all my best thoughts for the official review.

What I will say is that I love this movie. I grew up in the 1980s, and so slashers are my horror movie sweet spot, and this is one of my all-time favorites. Freddy Kreuger is a horror icon, and this is where he started. In later films he’d become a wise-cracking goof (admittedly a goof that will kill you in the end, but still a goof), but here he’s absolutely terrifying.

It was a stroke of genius having him kill inside of dreams, as that allows the film to eschew the laws of physics and reality. Anything goes, and the film makes good use of that. The imagery here is absolutely iconic. From the wall that turns elastic to the claws reaching up from the bathtub or the stairway steps turning to goo, to Freddy’s outstretched arms, the film is simply loaded with memorable shots. There is a wonderful tactile quality to the film and its use of practical effects. Sometimes that means you can see the filmmaking behind it – you can tell that the goo inside those steps is oatmeal, and when Freddy falls down the stairs, you can see the mattress he lands on—but I much prefer that to the CGI garbage so many modern films rely on.

So, yeah, I love this movie. I will have more to say about it and all of its sequels in a week or so. Look right here in these pages for that link when it comes out.

Funny story, just now as I’m about to post this I have a premonition to do a search of my site for this film, just in case I’d written about it before. I couldn’t remember writing about it, but I write a lot of stuff so I figured it wouldn’t hurt to do a quick search.

Friends I wrote a full review of the film (and its release in UHD) just over a year ago!

The Friday Night Horror Movie: What Lies Beneath (2020)

WHaT LIES BENEATH poster

Robert Zemeckis had an incredible run in the 1980s through the 1990s. It started with Romancing the Stone in 1984 and ran through the Back to the Future Trilogy, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Death Becomes Her, and Contact. I was a big fan. When I learned he was making a thriller with Michelle Pfeiffer and Harrison Ford, I was completely on board. I believe I saw it opening weekend in the theater. I was highly disappointed. I’ve not seen it since.

The Criterion Channel is currently running a bunch of horror films from the 2000s. This is one of them. Lately, I’ve been revisiting films from my youth that I didn’t much care for at the time to see if the decades since might have made me more attuned to their wavelength. This is especially true for films that my critic friends seem to like.

So, I figured it was time to revisit this one and see if I’ve changed my mind. Friends, it still stinks. Well, okay, it isn’t that bad, but it is a bit of a mess.

This is basically Zemeckis doing Hitchcock, but that’s not really a thing in his wheelhouse.

It begins like a Rear Window homage. Claire Spencer (Pfeiffer) and her husband, Norman (Ford) live in a big, beautiful, lakeside house in Vermont. He’s a fancy researcher at a fancy college. She gave up her musical career to be a mom. As the film begins, they are saying goodbye to their daughter, who is headed off to college. Claire is having a hard time with this. She’s lonely and bored.

She notices the new neighbors are often fighting. Loudly. One rainy night she spies him loading something (a big covered something) into the trunk of his car. Did he just murder his wife? Suspicions run even higher when she stops by with a welcoming package and realizes that the wife’s car is in the garage, but she seems to be gone. And the husband is being cagey.

But just as that idea gets going, the film shifts gears. Now Claire is seeing ghosts. She hears whispers, the front door keeps finding itself open, and the bath is filled with hot water when nobody’s home.

All of this works well enough. Ford and Pfeiffer are too good of actors, and Zemekis too talented a director for it not to, but it never rises above. It never quite thrilled me. I never really believed the ghost angle, and without that there isn’t much more to the story. I kept half expecting the neighbor to show back up and to be an actual killer. I think I would have preferred that to what we actually get.

The trailer for the film famously spoils half the movie and the big twist towards the end. I won’t do that in case you haven’t seen it. The first time I watched the film, I felt the ending really killed the film’s momentum, but this time I found the final act to be the most interesting. That’s when Zemeckis goes into full Hitchcock mode, allowing himself to move away from the problematic script (by Clark Gregg!) and into pure direction. Although, I’ll still admit there are some really silly bits to its conclusion.

It isn’t a terrible film, just not a great one. And with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to see how this marks the beginning of a downside to the director and his two stars.