Change Your Image
bensterpiszczek
Reviews
The Rage: Carrie 2 (1999)
The underrated and forgotten sequel, The Rage: Carrie 2, turns 25 years old today. "Happy Homecoming." -Rachel Lang
Have you ever watched a movie that everyone makes out to be bad but you actually find it really enjoyable? For me that movie was The Rage: Carrie 2, released on this day 25 years ago in 1999.
Back in October a few months ago, I watched the original 1976 Carrie for the umpteenth time. Even though have the Blu-Ray and DVD versions of this original cult classic, I watched it on HBO Max and realizing I had more than enough time left in my night I decided to take a gander at The Rage for curiosity sake. I got halfway through the movie before I experienced Internet problems and decided to go to bed and finish it the next morning. I did just that and found the experience to be a little more than enjoyable, and a little less than bad as reviews have made it out to be.
MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD:
The film follows a high school girl named Rachel Lang (Emily Bergl) who, like Carrie White before her, has a less than desirable home life, a mentally unstable mother, and possesses telekinetic abilities. These abilities begin to spiral out of control after her best friend Lisa Parker (Mena Suvari) kills herself by jumping from the school's roof. Unbeknownst to Rachel, the impetus for her suicide owes to a football jock named Eric Stark (Zachery Ty Bryan) sleeping with her to score points for a game the school's other football jocks concocted (Based on a real group of jocks known as the Spur Posse). Rachel falls in love with Jesse Ryan (Jason London), the one jock who does not approve of of the game or of the behavior of the other jocks. All while this is going on, the school's guidance counselor Sue Snell (Amy Irving reprising her role from the 1976 film) catches wind of both the game the jocks are playing and Rachel's powers, attempting to help her and avoid another tragedy akin to the prom from 1976. I don't want to tell you too much of the film's climax, but if you've seen the original then you probably already know what to expect. We spend so much time getting to know Rachel and everything she's going through that by the time we reach the after party in the climax, we're already emotionally invested. OH, and just when you thought there weren't any further connections to the original, it's eventually revealed that Rachel is Carrie White's HALF-SISTER through their mutual biological father Ralph White (Who we still never see).
Let's go over my five points:
STORY: I walked into this movie like many other movies with the mindset that this was going to be really BAD. I've watched stuff like Invasion of the Blood Farmers and Blood Waters of Dr. Z, and figured that this COULD be yet another terrible film. To my surprise however, it really wasn't. In fact, I strongly think the film's premise is very well thought out. Sure, it's not as sharp as the original 1976 Carrie, but it's still pretty entertaining and worth the watch. Where the original was a chilling blend of American Graffiti and Psycho, The Rage is a chilling blend of American Pie and Scream (the former is which also stars Mena Suvari and Eddie Kaye Thomas and was released later in 1999). Where Carrie is sort of like a darker and edgier version of the story of Cinderella, The Rage is a darker and edgier version of the story of Romeo & Juliet. R&J is even mentioned in passing early on in the film during a classroom scene. To pull a quote from Emily Bergl in the Fangoria magazine: "We want everyone to know Carrie 2 is a continuation, but at the same time it's also a very different movie. It's not really a remake, and it's not even a sequel. I see it more as the equivalent of how West Side Story relates to Romeo and Juliet. It's the same kind of story, but a very different take on it."
So why am I giving this a 8/10? Three reasons. Major spoilers ahead. I'm deducting two because there's a scene early on where a dog gets run over, but fortunately he lives to the end of the movie. Secondly, we have the way this movie handles Sue Snell, the only surviving cast member from the original film. A good amount of screen time has the audience investing in her character and her relationship with Rachel, only for her to be abruptly killed off in the climax. Her character arc in the film amounted to practically nothing. While she does try to atone for her involvement in the original film's events, her death prevents her from impacting the climax in any way. Another scene that came across as absurd is when Sue and Rachel go to the charred ruins of Bates High School where the original prom took place. There's no logical reason the destroyed building is still standing there after two decades other than plot contrivance.
EDITING: There were moments in the film where the editing went a little over the top. Several shots are in Black & White, and other parts where the picture convulses like a 90's grunge music video. One character throughout the film carries a video camera and several shots are shown through its POV. Even the soundtrack conveys the various moods of scenes in a timely way. It's these moments that encapsulate the 1990's well. As if Amy Irving's involvement with the film and the subtitle wasn't enough, there all a few seconds of flashbacks featuring footage from the original 1976 film. They weren't essential, but they were fine. Kinda funny how Carrie's name is in the title and she has only 10 seconds of screen time from these flashbacks.
ACTING: The cast did a brilliant job bringing their respective characters to life. Amy Irving reprising her role as Sue Snell felt very natural, as if two decades haven't passed. Emily Bergl's performance as Rachel Lang is what makes the character believable, as is her chemistry with Jason London's character. It's not forced in any way, and I liked that. Bergl was even nominated for a Saturn Award for her performance.
DIALOG: The scripting feels very by the numbers, especially the dialog written for the high schoolers. The way the lines are delivered makes you feel as if these people are actually in high school, when in reality only Zachery Ty Bryan, Mena Suvari, and Eddie Kaye Thomas were teenagers at the time of filming. Most of the "teenage" cast (even Bergl) were in their early 20's.
SPECIAL EFFECTS: The rampage at the end of the film is where the crux of special effects lie. There are practical effects that make the damage look convincing at best, and there are bits and pieces of carnage that come across as 1990's early CGI at the least. It's a mixed bag for me.
As I mentioned above I had to wait until morning to watch the second half because of Internet problems, and as a result I made it my mission to have a physical copy for my movie collection. I have THREE copies of the movie as of this review. The VHS copy I have is a rental copy I need to replace, as the tape squeaks early on then frizzes out during the end credits. Even then the picture is dark and is in full screen. My DVD copy came from Walmart as a part of the "Carrie 3-Film Collection". This is the easiest version to find today, as my favorite of the three copies I own has become harder to find. As a testament to how underrated and forgotten The Rage: Carrie 2 is, there WAS a Blu-Ray release from Scream Factory in April 2015 as a part of a double feature with the 2002 made-for-TV Carrie movie. This 2-disc set has since gone out of print in October 2019, and as of late 2023, copies are harder to find and usually command fairly high prices. I got my copy off eBay in November 2023 for $62 and some change along with the 2002 TV special.
Despite its merits, The Rage: Carrie 2 was a box office bomb, grossing only $17 million against a $21 million dollar budget. The film probably wasn't in theaters for that long anyway, and if you don't already know where I'm going with this, let me spell it out for you. The movie is about a goth teenager that goes on a killing spree against her classmates. What happened weeks later? Columbine. A movie website summed it up by saying: "I point this out not to draw some spurious connection between the two events, but to emphasize how narrowly The Rage escaped going straight into a vault, never to be seen by the public. In March of '99, Carrie 2 was merely a morally confused teenage revenge fantasy, something screenwriter Raphael Moreu could have extracted from the brain of virtually any adolescent malcontent in America. A month later, however, it looked disturbingly like an apologia for Harris and Klebold's killing spree -and frankly, it still does."
Imagine this: You attend Columbine High School and its April 20th, 1999. You and some friends decide to skip school for the day to celebrate 420 and smoke, then go to the movie theater to watch The Rage: Carrie 2. After the movie, you come home and your parents are were worried sick, fearing for your life only to learn you are still alive because you wanted to get high and see a movie about an edgy teenager who goes on a killing spree against her classmates. Imagine explaining that to your folks after they explain to you that two edgy teenagers went on a killing spree at the school you attend. This movie is LACED with irony.
In conclusion, The Rage: Carrie 2 is a movie that's not as bad as some make it out to be. Sure, the movie is something of a rehash of its 1976 predecessor, but it's different enough to where I can personally say it's an entertaining, contemporary reimagining of Stephen King's original story. Happy 25th Anniversary.
Zaat (1971)
The Creature From The Black Lagoon meets Plan 9 in what may very well be the lowest-rated film I have reviewed
Thanks to a Brandon Tenold, I came across the film I am writing the 100th review for on this site. Shot in Florida over a period of a month in 1970 and released in 1971 or 1972, Zaat (AKA Blood Waters Of Dr. Z) is a low-budget film that takes a concept akin to The Creature From The Black Lagoon, riddled in with a style of camp that brings to mind Plan 9 From Outer Space.
The film is about a former Nazi mad scientist named Dr. Kurt Leopold who creates a formula (Z sub-A, A sub-T) which he uses to transform himself into a monster that is supposed to resemble a human-catfish hybrid, but looks nothing like one. The monster scientist then takes the formula and releases it into the rivers and sea throughout town, while killing random civilians and attempting to kidnap pretty women as a means of creating a mate to populate the ocean with an entire race of catfish people. After an investigation by a police officer and a marine biologist, they hire an organization known as INPIT to help. The film climaxes with the female agent getting kidnapped and the male agent, the officer, and marine biologist mounting a rescue mission. I really cannot explain any more than I could here. Zaat is a movie you have to see for yourself to believe. It's terrible in terms of its script, acting, and special effects.
First, the story. It's a rudimentary premise that could be evenly paced into a 30-minute short film. At 100 minutes, however, It has so many filler scenes that the pacing becomes uneven. This is especially notable at the hour mark, immediately after the monster kills two teenagers making out on the porch (complete with early-70's PG blood and gore effects) where the cop comes across a group of hippies who are playing a guitar and a flute for a wacky musical number even as they're being escorted to the local jail. The first 20 minutes of the film are also filler, with an opening monologue about fish (complete with footage of various organisms) and Leopold walking around his lab turning on equipment. It's oddly watchable while still maintaining its camp.
The acting is also pretty dull, with credit going to a moment where the monster kills a family on a boat. At one point, the actor inside the monster suit misses his cue and is just standing there...menacingly. While on that note, let's talk about the Zaat monster. The suit in particular owes to the special effects failure this film is notable for. The suit looks like it's made from an insulated jumpsuit covered with green pinata paper, with the mask in particular being a gas mask with the addition of papier-mâché. It's also so very clear that the guy in the costume couldn't see anything, and this is obvious in moments where he walks around and trips on scenery or other achievements of hand-eye coordination failure such as failing to cross out pictures or grasping anything in his immediate reach. During one of the kills, the monster BARELY punches his victim and she just dies like that. It's actually quite amusing.
The special effects and editing in other areas are no better, especially in shots where it appears very deep underwater, yet on the surface it looks pretty shallow. There was even meant to be a subplot involving human sized catfish roaming the city, but it was cut because of how terrible the special effects were. This is why the characters mention walking catfish running around. Even the characters themselves are downright poorly written, with credit going to the police officer who, after an hour or so more of screentime investigating the monster's work, FINALLY decide to head to his hidden laboratory out in the open. So after all this time, you finally decide to check out the lab?
In conclusion, Zaat is an incredible film... in the art of being incredibly bad. It's so bad it's good. The only semblance of production value is the scene towards the end where the male INPIT agent gets bitten by a snake, which was never in the script. It's a very juvenile effort of filmmaking that I hope inspires others, however limited their talents may be.
Horror High (1973)
A drive-in schockfest made goofier by dummy writing and spotty logic in the plot, yet grotesque special effects that make it worthwhile.
I came across this flick like many other would have. Copious manhours on the internet looking at trailers for old 70's science fiction and horror movies. When I heard about this one, it was only a matter of time before I checked it out for free on YouTube or some other website. I haven't written any reviews for cheap movies in a while and this looked promising, and the rest is history. Shot in Irving, Texas over a period of two weeks and released in 1973/1974, Horror High (AKA Twisted Brain) is a movie that is very much so a product of its time. Campy special effects, a chintzy script with clunky writing, and super low-budget (An estimated $67K).
Horror High tells the story of a shy nerd named Vernon Potts who's favorite school subject is Bio chemistry. This is the impetus for bullying he puts up with from jock Roger Davis, his P. E. and English teachers, and even the crusty and rumpled janitor Mr. Griggs alike. The only person who befriends him is Roger's girlfriend Robin Jones. One night, he sneaks into the chemistry room to attend to the lab guinea pig Mr. Mumps, only to find that a formula he concocted for his experiment turned the guinea pig into a ravenous beast, thus killing the janitor's cat. Griggs catches Vernon in the lab and subsequently forces him to drink the drug, which makes Vernon ravenous himself as he dunks Mr. Griggs into a vat of sulphuric acid, killing him. Despite Vernon disposing of the evidence, the remains are discovered, and a Lieutenant (played by Assault on Precinct 13's Austin Stoker) comes to the school to investigate. Due to lack of evidence, he leaves.
Vernon's English teacher Mrs. Grindstaff tells him that because of his struggling performance in her class, he has to attend every literature club meeting for the rest of the semester in order to get a graduation credit. He attends, but spends the meeting in the lab making another batch of drugs that transform him into something that barely resembles a werewolf. Vernon then kills Grindstaff with the paper guillotine that she previously used to cut up his Biology assignment.
Following another evidence-free investigation by Lieutenant Bozeman, P. E. Coach McCall (Played by former NFL Cowboys and Eagles offensive guard John Hugh Niland) offers Vernon a chance to skip P. E. for the rest of the year in exchange for letting Roger (who is McCall's star pupil on the high school football team) cheat off of Vernon's chemistry paper so he can stay on the football team. Despite Vernon's protests, McCall gives him time to think it over, but tells him to stay complicit. That night, McCall waits for Vernon to call, but encounters Bozeman and his police squad, who suspect him of the murders. McCall quickly talks himself out of getting arrested. Soon after, McCall encounters Vernon (who has consumed another batch of the formula) who lacerates McCall's chest with track spikes, killing him. Bozeman's squad discover the dead body and arrest Roger after finding him wandering around the building.
The next day, Vernon asks Robin on a date later that night. Before Vernon can go on the date, Roger (who was released due to lack of evidence) calls him and tells Vernon that he saw him sneak into the lab the previous night, and Roger threatens to frame him unless he meets him at the school in an hour. When Vernon arrives, he drinks another batch of formula and runs into Robin, who tells him Roger plans to kill Vernon. Vernon, however, reveals to Robin that he was the one who murdered everyone. After another transformation, Vernon chases Robin through the school and the police (played by other former NFL players for the Dallas Cowboys) show up and start firing on Vernon. He meets Roger outside and starts beating him to the ground, then the police come and shoot Vernon to death. The film ends with Robin mourning over Vernon's dead body as the other characters just stand there doing nothing. Cue short credits.
That's the core of the plot. And its full or issues, most of which can be traced back to J. D. Feigelson's screenplay. First of all, if there are murders happening inside of an educational facility, wouldn't it be a good idea to cancel classes for the next few weeks during the investigation? Bozeman even remarks on this during the investigation of Grindstaff's murder. Speaking of, during the same scene, a detective uses a fingerprint brush on the paper guillotine. It's not like Vernon wore gloves or anything when he killed the teacher (unless the batch of drugs erased his fingerprints from his fingers somehow). Even after this and the next murder investigation, there's still a vague "lack of evidence". Also, you'd think after the first murder, someone would make sure ALL the doors and windows are locked.
The film, however, is not without merit. It's got some pretty fair gore effects. I should also mention that when the movie was originally released, The Motion Picture Association of America slapped it with an R-rating (RESTRICTED: UNDER 17 REQUIRES ACCOMPANYING PARENT OR ADULT GUARDIAN), with edits made to secure a PG-rating (PARENTAL GUIDENCE SUGGESTED: SOME MATERIAL MAY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR PRE-TEENAGERS). I wasn't sure which version I've watched, but if I had to guess, it must've been the uncut R-rated one. The kills and overall special effects are bloody at best (the deaths of the English teacher and Coach) and cheesy at worst (the janitor's death). The acting and dialog is also kind of cheesy too, just take a shot every time Roger calls Vernon "Creeper". He does it THAT often. The editing, believe it or not, compliments the bizarre nature of the film in the form of sudden scare chords, badass guitar music, and other offbeat sound effects. It might be one of the few good things this film has to offer.
And now the story... On paper, its an interesting concept, but it falls short of being a hybrid of I Was A Teenage Werewolf and Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, mixed in with inattentive writing that formulates a metric buttload of artistic license in the areas of law, biology, chemistry, education, and physics, to name a few. It's a premise that wasn't very well thought out, but at the end of the day, it is what it is and it's mindless entertainment.
In conclusion, Horror High isn't so much "A scream and a blast!" as the trailer makes it out to be, as it is a case study in the field of low-budget filmmaking and drive-in flicks. It's the kind of film best watched late on a cold night, preferably in the fall around Halloween, and one that is as trashy as it is entertaining.
Space Jam: A New Legacy (2021)
Space Jam: A New Legacy THOUGHTS
When I first heard there was going to be a new Space Jam reboot (sometime after watching the 1996 film for the first time during the 2020 pandemic), I became convinced that Hollywood really tries to play up the classics by rebooting EVERYTHING. Star Wars, Halloween, Jay & Silent Bob, the list never ends.
It goes without saying that the original Space Jam is a Warner Brothers classic. It's a funny throwback film with a sense of fun and escapist wonder. My first viewing of the film was a smooth and unique experience that I often have with cult classics.
Fast forward a year later in the pandemic's aftermath, and I'm with four other friends watching A New Legacy in theaters. Like many reboots, it incorporates tropes synonymous with the term Generation Z. It involves smartphones, technology, groundbreaking Computer Animated Imagery (CGI), and what better way to incorporate Basketball than to put a big shot like LeBron James on the big screen (in the same way Michael Jordan filled the role of an iconic basketball superstar in 1996).
Spoilers ahead, this is your final warning. So let's talk about the plot. It begins in 1998 with a young LeBron James becoming distracted by video games and learns that he needs to "apply all" of he wishes to play basketball. He throws out a used original Nintendo GameBoy his friend gives him and we cut to a montage of James's career playing over the opening credits like the first movie. In the present day, James has a family including two sons, one who plays basketball often and his other son Dom (who loves video games) who is a child prodigy that can actually program and homebrew his own video games.
James and his family visit the Warner brothers studio and Dom takes an interest in the studio software known as Al-G Rhythm, who traps James and Dom into virtual reality. Al-G takes Dom as a prisoner and attempts to use him to beat his father (the LeBron James) in a basketball game, where Al-G instructs James to assemble a team of players for a basketball game in the span of 24 hours.
James meets Bugs Bunny in Tune World (and only Bugs, as every other Looney Tune left Tune World thanks to Al-G convincing them to explore other realities by being in crossovers of properties such as Mad Max, Wonder Woman, ect), and essentially reunites the original Tune Squad (sans Pepé Le Pew due to the Culture Wars), and once the Tune Squad is reassembled, Al-G kidnaps every Warner Brothers properties (including R-rated films like It (Pennywise)and A Clockwork Orange) and kidnaps people from the REAL WORLD on their phones to watch the game, the James family withstanding.
Al-G then "upgrades" the Tune Squad by rendering the Looney Tunes in an astonishing CGI. Tune Squad goes up against Goon Squad, consisting of video game characters Dom designed led by Dom himself. During the first half, Goon Squad outnumbers Tune Squad heavily, and as if that wasn't bad enough, the biggest letdown occurred. During the halftime break, Sylvester attempts to recruit former Tune Squad member Michael Jordan (from the 1996 film) but accidentally locates Michael B. Jordan instead. I genuinely fell for that, and I have no idea why they did that. Yeah it was a funny joke and all, but at least have Michael Jordan give LeBron James a little wisdom to bring strength to the group, ya know?
So in the final half of the basketball game, LeBron tells Dom that he no longer wants to stand in the way of his dreams, and Buggs welcomes him into the Tune Squad with Al-G assuming control of Goon Squad. The Looney Tunes use their cartoon physics to make a comeback and the Tune Squad ends up winning when Bugs sacrifices himself by pulling a glitch maneuver that deletes him and posterizes Al-G, basically offing him. The movie then ends with Bugs actually surviving and walking off into the sunset w LeBron.
When I walked out of the theater, I felt that the movie, while not as good as the original (for a few reasons),can still pass as mindless entertainment the first time around. It's a pretty funny movie that's worth a watch, despite the negative reviews. One scene in particular that had me laughing in my seat was when during the big game, the Tune Squad turns into a group of rappers with Porky the pig roasting Al-G, it came out of nowhere and it was pretty hilarious.
The characters, while not memorable to the 1996 film's degree, were still fun. LeBron James and his family dynamic intertwining with the current state of Looney Tunes (both literally and figuratively) attempted to make a stronger story out of the original while introducing modern themes. I'm almost under the impression that the title A New Legacy can be a reference to Gen Z.
In conclusion, I walked into Space Jam: A New Legacy with fairly low expectations (sans hoping Michael Jordan shows up), and I walked out mostly satisfied. Not one hundred percent moved (like with It (2017) and The Iron Giant (1999)), but satisfied. I went out to the movies with my friends for a fun night, and the Looney Tunes came through.
Super 8 (2011)
10 years later, Super 8 still holds up as a film.
Sometime during November 2011, my dad rented Super 8 at the nearest 7-Eleven's Redbox (Blockbuster was no more) and we watched it that night. I will never forget the nostalgia I got when watching the film, and I'll never forget that first viewing.
Released in 2011, Super 8 tells the story of a group of friends in 1979 who come together to shoot a homemade monster movie, but tensions rise when a train (carrying Alien cargo) crashes as they're filming a scene for the movie. I'm not going to spoil the rest of the film beyond that, because it's one of those films you just see for yourself.
The story is a mix between a science fiction narrative (a darker version of 1982's E. T.) and a drama about coping with loss. It's almost like Lilo and Stitch in that you have a broken family intertwining with an alien race arriving on earth. It's a very consistent and cohesive narrative with a few fun twists and jokes. The characters are lovable at best and "just there" at worst. You have Joe Lamb (portrayed by Joel Courtney) and his father Jack, the Deputy of the police department, who are trying to move on after the loss of Elizabeth, Joe's mother/Jack's wife. This subplot works and it develops their characters. You have Alice Dainard (portrayed by Elle Fanning), who is Joe's love interest and his best friend Charles Kaznyk (portrayed by Riley Griffiths) who is making the zombie movie. The other kids are somewhat one dimensional and are just there, but their acting and dialog isn't bad. At best, it's really good and gives life to the characters, particularly Joe, Alice, Charles, Jack, and Glynn Turman's Dr. Thomas Woodward.
The editing is decent and special effects are heavy on CGI, not all of which looks realistic, but it's okay. This being a JJ Abrams film, there's too much use of the lens flare (like in Star Trek 2009). That being said, the cinematography is pretty crisp and it compliments the rest of the narrative's tone. It takes ideas and tropes from Steven Spielberg's classic films and breathes new life into them. In fact, Spielberg was a producer on the film, and as a result the film stands there with Gremlins (1984), The Goonies (1985), Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (1977), and ect. The fact that this movie was released five years before Stranger Things (2016) makes it all the more fascinating.
In conclusion, it's officially been TEN YEARS since the release of this Super 8, and it still holds up as a science fiction classic. I highly recommend this film if you have Paramount+, like Spielberg, science fiction, or wanna watch some of JJ Abram's other superior work that isn't The Force Awakens (2015) or The Rise Of Skywalker (2019).
It's me, Billy (2021)
To pull a quote from Margot Kidder's Barb, "Not bad".
This review assumes you've seen BOTH Black Christmas (1974) and this fan film. This is your final warning.
When I first heard word that an unofficial fan-made sequel to the original Black Christmas (1974) was in production, I gave a wan smile of approval. It goes without saying that the legacy of the 1974 cult classic has been built over the years due to two things, the first being the fact that the 1974 film never even had a sequel, but rather two remakes (that are both lame), the second being how scary the original is; The mystery of the killer "Billy", the soundtrack with eerie Christmas music, and how the killer never got caught. It stands out among other classic horror films not just for these reasons, but because it was considered the first modern slasher movie ever made.
With that being said, the idea of a sequel is not without fault, however. In fact, as I write this review, I think more about the plot of It's Me, Billy. Before I begin to explain my likes and dislikes, I'm going to tell you the plot
The film begins with three women named Sam, Justine, and Emma who are on their way to Jess Bradford's large countryside house for one final Christmas there. Emma's father wants to sell the house and Sam is the granddaughter of Jess, who survived the original film and became famous after many interviews and writing a book called "The Belmont Murders" (which is basically Jess's involvement in the plot of Black Christmas). A random neighbor leaves them with a key, and the three girls stay at the house overnight. During their stay, Sam and Emma discuss Sam's mother/Jess's daughter and how she died young and how Jess is (presumably) dead. When they are eating dinner with Justine, they discuss Peter (from the original film), and how Jess killed him thinking he was killer. This scene also reveals that Jess DID NOT get an abortion after the events of Black Christmas, and that Peter is Sam's grandfather.
Then, the girls start to get calls from Billy, complete with the rotary dial phone. Once the girls go to bed, noise is heard in the house, and Emma investigates it. Then Billy kills Justine very much like how Barb was killed in the original, complete with Billy's face being framed in shadow with only his eye shown. After that, Sam is awoken by noise and the ring of a rotary dial phone, gets another call from Billy, checks to see if her friends are dead, and goes into the attic. What follows is a montage shot of Sam looking at newspaper articles, a copy of The Belmont Murders sitting on a shelf, and more while Silent Night (the EXACT rendition from the opening titles of Black Christmas) plays in the background. Then Sam discovers a dead Justine in the rocking chair. She encounters Billy (as well as the original rotary dial phone from Christmas 1974) and runs out of the house and flags down the first car she sees, coincidentally being the random neighbor at the beginning of the film. It's then revealed that her name is Agnes and she chloroforms Sam, then takes her back to the house as Emma is revealed to be dead, killed the same way Claire Harrison was in the 1974 film. The film ends with Billy dragging Sam into a cellar or basement and locking her inside. There, she discovers Jess, who is revealed to be still alive. And the credits roll.
That's the plot of It's Me, Billy. And I had some minor issues with the plot and to a smaller degree the movie itself. The film surprisingly undermines the ending to the original (but being a fan film I can look past this and much of the other small things) and has Jess become a positive survivor figure, whereas Laurie Strode left Halloween (1978) severely traumatized and unable to find closure. What they did with Jess is vague at best, but I was confused by her decision to not have an abortion after Black Christmas. Throughout that film, she insists and states multiple times that she wants to have an abortion, who what made her change her mind after Christmas 1974 all of a sudden?
Like the characters in the original, they are developed to some degree before being killed by Billy. In this film, we actually see more of him (complete with distorted POV shots and long white hair), as there is no longer a red herring here. The reveal of the random neighbor to be Agnes herself was a fanservice twist, but it contradicts Bob Clark's behind the scenes notes on the character whom Billy kept referring to in Black Christmas. Not to mention it begs multiple questions: Why are Billy and Agnes kidnapping Jess and Sam? Where was Agnes during Black Christmas? The more I think about it, the more it confuses me.
What I did like about the film, however, was that other than the Agnes twist, the fanservice was on point. I wish we would've gotten a less subtle reference to Barb or maybe some other character for continuity purposes, but it's a fan film. It doesn't have to be perfect. I also liked the use of Silent Night from the original film's opening credits, as well as how silent some scenes were, as they helped build suspense.
In conclusion, It's Me, Billy is a good fan film (despite a few minor issues) that I highly recommend if you've seen Black Christmas from 1974.
Cannibal Girls (1973)
First thoughts: For Andrea Martin and Ivan Reitman's (2nd) film debut, this Drive-in flick isn't terrible.
Another 70's drive-in movie review that begins with me browsing a horror streaming service. I primarily chose this because Andrea Martin (Black Christmas actress) and Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters director) were involved, and the exploitation flick premise of young women killing men for the purpose of food sounds... interestingly say the least.
Released in 1973, Cannibal Girls tells of a couple (played by Eugene Levy and Martin) who visit a town in Canada called Farnhamville after their car breaks down, where they are told an urban legend about the titular Cannibal Girls and how they murder and eat young men who pass into town. The women? Either they join the so-called cannibal cult or they too are eaten? The film doesn't make it clear enough, and as such, there are moments of the film that mess with you. Like, it confuses you with a morbid sense of wonder.
There was one such bit that does for me. It's a blink and you'll miss it moment but there's a scene with a barber scraping the ear off a client and said client screams. It doesn't really have anything to do with the plot and it's really there for minor shock value. The film uses those moments, as well as the two main characters journey to mess with you in that everything is meant to be somewhat surreal.
Also, I can't help but think that Ronald Ulrich's character (the Amish Abraham Lincoln looking priest) was inspired by Charles Manson. It was around that time the cult leader became infamous for his many crimes.
In conclusion, Cannibal Girls was alright. It's definitely a product of its time and was an interesting watch but I'll review better and more notable horror films in the near future.
Invasion of the Blood Farmers (1972)
I fell asleep several times watching what loosely could even be called a film; no wonder old people complain about their time being wasted.
I've heard of this film for years now, and that's because when I was a pre-teen like 10 years ago I'd always watch random YouTube videos of creepy low-budget 60's and 70's horror film trailers. This film in particular stood out as so weird yet somehow intriguing. It's rated PG (PARENTAL GUIDANCE SUGGESTED) for crying out loud.
As it turns out, Invasion of the Blood Farmers was made on a bubblegum budget of $24,000 and directed by someone named Ed Adlum. He paid his actors in 6 packs of beer for the most part, and shot the film over the course of three weekends primarily at his own home.
The movie's uncanny premise centers around a bunch of Druids (Aliens in the original script, but axed for budgetary reasons) who disguise themselves as farmers in upstate New York who maim and kidnap people for the purposes of draining every last drop of blood from their bodies so they can resurrect their queen. Other than that, the film just sucks, and for all the right reasons.
The script was shoddily written, and several actors having to read off cue cards didn't help things very much. The characters aren't well thought out, as most of who we see onscreen is killed in a fairly disturbing yet goofy way. Night and day shots are mixed THROUGHOUT the entire film, and none of the actors bother to add-lib exactly what time of day it really is for consistency purposes. Oh, and the ending SUCKS. It feels pissed away and seems to present the possibility of loose ends, not to mention the Druid Blood Farmers are defeated by an object a character pulls out that you can't even SEE. The film is devoid of logic.
Overall, Invasion of the Blood Farmers is a bad film. If you like bad films, check this one out!
Clerks (1994)
In the early 90's, Kevin Smith played an absurdly high-stakes game that resulted in this masterpiece. A true work of art.
More often than not, I will watch a movie for a second time in a row because it exceeds my expectations; the more you think about it, the more you like it. Clerks is a film that is proven to do this upon your first two or three viewings.
About 10 years ago, I watched Jay & Silent Bob Strikes Back for the first time, and stumbled upon what's known as the View Askewniverse, a series of films created by Kevin Smith. This legacy began with the film "Clerks", and the story behind how this film was made BLOWS MY MIND.
To fund the film (which was made on a $27,575 budget), Kevin Smith cashed out his life savings, unspent college funds, insurance money from a flood that destroyed his car, maxed out 8 to 10 credit cards with $2,000 limits, and even sold the majority of his priceless comic book collection. Smith shot the film in the span of three weeks at the convince store he was working at in real life during closing hours overnight (10:30 pm to 5:30 pm), as he was not allowed to film inside the store during the day. He lost copious amounts of sleep in the process, as he worked from 6:30 am to 10 pm during the day, and shot the film every other hour, starting at 11 pm and ending at 4 am. He only got ONE HOUR of sleep every night for THREE weeks. If that's not dedication to work, I don't know what is. Not to mention at least most of the finished budget went towards the rights to the soundtrack.
As an adult who works at retail, Clerks is a movie that I can relate to. It's a movie with a zany variety of weird and clueless customers (played by Smith's friends), store clerks who feel as if there is nothing going on in life and want more, and discussions on the topics of philosophy, ideals, and popular culture. It's the story of Dante (a put-upon clerk torn between two women) and Randal (A wisecracker who holds his own against said clueless customers) as they slack their way through the day, playing hockey on the roof and going to a wake, all while Jay & Silent Bob deal drugs in front of the store.
The acting is pretty well done, especially considering that almost everybody involved either film was an unknown. Clerks made stars out of these people. The dialog is pretty well written (and it was vulgar to the point where Clerks nearly received an NC-17 rating), with editing and cinematography that, while a trifle choppy, nonetheless add to the film's grounded and realistic atmosphere. This approach is complimented by the use of a Black & White camera, which was primarily utilized for to the fact that the film was a REALLY on the cheap affair. This then brings us to the story.
The story is pretty well written for something that was shot on such a small amount of cash (cash made from pawning off every asset Smith had in his pocket, as well as an additional $3,000 from his parents when the camera could only be rented with cash). Dante is a man torn between a woman he once dated in high school and a woman he is currently dating who wants him to go back to college. He works at a convenience store with his friend Randall who runs the video store next door. Randall is a carefree young man who causally rebuffs his customers, rude or not. Throughout the day, they encounter every last type of customer a customer service associate could encounter, while going on a handful of misadventures once Dante's boss inexplicably leaves town for a while.
In conclusion, Clerks is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED for people who have worked customer service jobs, have a desire for filmmaking, and/or love raunchy comedies. I personally am all of the above. If you haven't watched Clerks yet, give it a go.
Dennis the Menace (1993)
The early 90's had a lot of strange films with misguided logos, but this film-directed by the guy who played the original Michael Myers-takes the cake.
I first watched this film (Directed by Nick Castle) on VHS many moons ago, and today it's one of those films you can find on Netflix like Space Jam. As an adult; two or three things in this film really make no sense. First, I should explain the premise.
The film is about a 5 year old named Dennis Mitchell and an oldster named George Wilson. Dennis is out of school for the summer, and Wilson knows this is no good, as he is always the butt-end of these jokes that are essentially similar to Home Alone traps (John Hughes worked on both films). Wilson is to become the host of a garden party during the summer, but when a homeless man starts a string of burglaries, it tests Dennis and Wilson's bond.
There are two things in this motion picture that I have ISSUES with:
The plant that George Wilson has at his garden party and the nonsensical biological logic behind it. According to him, this plant (identified as a Night blooming mock orchid) takes FORTY YEARS to grow; the blooming part itself not withstanding. That in itself lasts FIFTEEN SECONDS, and after that, the plant just wilts and dies quickly. There exists NO plant whatsoever that would evolve a trait that takes that window of time to grow. It provides no benefits toward survival, as flowers are a plant's sex organs that form into fruit and subsequently drops seeds. It's highly unlikely, especially when you consider the fact that nobody would be able to time the blooming of the flower down to the exact minute in four decades. The more I think about this, the less it makes sense.
*It gets even dumber. George Wilson spends forty years growing a plant that he is fully aware will bloom for a quarter of a minute knowing that he won't live long enough after it blooms to grow another one if something goes awry. He was only able to grow JUST ONE of these plants, so it's not like he has a backup plan whatsoever, and on the night of the garden party he hosts, his house is robbed by the burglar. Dennis is the only one who witnesses the robbery, as Mr. Wilson made him stay in the house after he accidentally knocked over a table of refreshments. Dennis tells Mr. Wilson that his house has been robbed just as the plant is about to bloom. They all miss the blooming (and because they're old people, it's not like they know how to record things with a camera) and the third act sets in motion.
The second act and the chicken George cooks. Dennis wants to help his friends paint a treehouse, and Dennis spills some pain in his garage, which he cleans up with a shop vacuum and accidentally shoots into Wilson's grill with the chicken on it. He doesn't notice this even after he puts the lid on the grill and he walks away, where it sets ABLAZE, the next we see if the chicken, it looks PERFECTLY FINE. It actually looks edible, when realistically it should be charred. If that were the case, he'd be like GODDAMMIT DENNIS!-
During the scene where he subsequently investigates the Mitchell garage, and the golf ball is in the vacuum tube. It's sitting on an elevated platform (some kind of grate?) protruding out of the tube as opposed to being within it. This one is minor, but still.
This deleted scene that takes place between the kids finishing the treehouse and Dennis arriving back at the Wilson house before the garden party. From what I read, in this scene, the burglar (Switchblade Sam) visits the kids, and offers them candy (and in Margret's case her doll that the burglar previously stole) in exchange for information regarding their parent's valuables. Dennis then proceeds to tell him about Wilson's stash of coins hidden in the book safe. THIS SCENE ALONE EXPLAINS 3 THINGS:
*How Margret inexplicably has her doll back in possession during the search for Dennis in the third act.
*How the burglar knows where Dennis and Wilson live.
*How said burglar found the coins in the house so easily.
Why did this scene get taken out? It would've made Dennis look like a straight dumbass, while also implying that his parents didn't teach him much about talking to strangers. Seriously, this scene proves Dennis caused the problem with the coins initially. It's almost like they took it out because it would've made the rest of the film so predictable.
In conclusion, I enjoyed Dennis The Menace a lot as a kid, but I'll always think about what I just explained above.
The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)
Before the Sequel Trilogy... Before Jar Jar Binks... Before the Ewoks... there was The Star Wars Holiday Special.
As far as I know, I've watched a crap ton of crappy movies, and reviewed a few here so far, but I'm going to do something a little different today.
I LOVE Star Wars. I love it to the point where, I decided to keep a log of every Star Wars novel and comic I've been reading since the release of The Rise Of Skywalker. I have a pretty good variety built up of lore, with a majority of it being the majority of material released between the first film's novelization from 1976 and to the Dark Empire comics from 30 years ago. I actually decided to make an updated chronological list of material I have read to see how much work I put into my expansion of the universe. In the process of doing so, I forgot one small thing.
Sometime during my senior year of High School, I watched this for the first time. I was having the time of my life and wanted to see how bad this film really was. It took me three nights to watch it on that first time, it was THAT boring.
It wasn't until I made that list that I realized I had to sit through the 98 minute mess that is The Star Wars Holiday Special once again, and if it were not for the Star Wars pop culture craze of the 70's and 80's, this special might have been lost forever. It aired ONCE on November 17th, 1978 and PANNED, and there's very much so a reason for this.
The other night, I decided to sit through this made for television mess again, this time in one sitting. It wasn't as terrible as I remember it, in the sense that I'm used to seeing terrible films with recycled footage from other films, incoherent dialog, and many manner of plot holes that are there because the script said so. But the movie was still cheesy and downright BAD. It's almost so bad it's good, but I'm biased because Star Wars is incredible.
The premise is simple; Han Solo and Chewbacca (respectively played by Harrison Ford and Peter Mayhew) are on their way to Kashyyyk (it's actually called Kazzook here, but I'm not using that) so that Chewie can celebrate a holiday known as Life Day with his wife Malla, his son Lumpy, and his dad Itchy. How does a simple premise stretch itself out into 2 hours? Easy! The special centers MOSTLY around Malla, Lumpy, and Itchy as they worry Chewbacca hasn't come back. My primary issue with this is that the Wookiees roar WITHOUT so much as some SUBTITLES. Literally 50% of the show is the Wookiees roaring without any indication as to what they're saying. And as if none of that were bad enough, some Imperials raid their home because of "suspected Rebel activity". Why the Empire came to Kashyyyk is unclear realistically, except that the script simply demanded they show up to add tension and raise the stakes for our heroes. It makes no sense, especially since the only imperials the heroes fight is a single stormtrooper Han knocks off a ledge and some other stormtroopers in the animated segment.
I must mention the animated segment as a breather. During the Imperial raid in Chewbacca's home, Lumpy watches some kind of television set that is playing this special. It's the one saving grace of the show that's notable for being the FIRST APPEARANCE of Boba Fett. Being one of the most iconic characters in Star Wars, this was a treat that I feel is most canonical element of The Holiday Special within the Expanded Universe timeline that's now known as Legends. The Mandalorian's rifle is even inspired by Boba Fett's ray staff in the animated segment, it's that worthy of acknowledgement.
When we cut back to the special, Han and Chewbacca arrive, and all the other main heroes of A New Hope (Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Princess Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher), and the droids Artoo and Threepio) arrive while an under the influence Leia (Fisher) preforms a musical number. Chewbacca has flashbacks to A New Hope and celebrates dinner with his family. The end.
Aside from the Original Trilogy heroes that are just there as a cash-in to the success of 1977's Star Wars, the Wookiees and particularly the other ancillary characters are forgettable. It's simply a bunch of other television stars joining in like its the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. There's a guy with a computer, a guy with four arms cooking, some holographic jazz music video, and a bunch of other things that are strange and out of place in the Star Wars universe.
On top of a convoluted narrative, we get forgettable acting from the minor characters and forced acting from the heroes (particularly from Ford, who at times makes it feel as if he's being held at gunpoint while speaking lines on camera), and the dialogue is a trifle exaggerated. The cheesiest is with the cinematography and editing. It's clearly a low-budget approach. There's a cheaply-made set of the Millennium Falcon's cockpit, a Ralph McQuarrie painting that serves as Chewbacca's home, and (at most) 5% of the entire film's footage being stock footage from A New Hope (including Deleted Scenes from the film). When the Falcon is landing on Kashyyyk, the footage shown is that of the Falcon's landing on Yavin in A New Hope.
In conclusion, The Star Wars Holiday Special is a movie best described as proof that early on in the Star Wars universe there was still a side to Star Wars lore that can be seen as so bad that unlike the Sequel Trilogy or certain other characters that have received notoriety, it is forgotten by many for the reasons we all agree on. It's a cheesy old movie. A cheesy old movie that managed to receive something of a cult following because of its association with a big property. It's a period piece of a film that will live down in history. May the Force be with you.
Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things (1972)
A raw but eerie start to Bob Clark's short lived horror career
I've already talked about Dead Of Night and HIGHLY APPRAISED Black Christmas, both directed by Bob Clark and both released in 1974. Before I've even heard of those two films, I came across an eerie trailer for this film.
Released in 1972, Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things is a movie that I best describe as Bob Clark's attempt to have a laugh out of the walking dead films that became popular thanks to Night Of The Living Dead. This movie's overall gothic 70's drive-in aesthetic is a component that compliments the film well, although the film itself can be a bit tiring.
The film is about a theater troupe led by their egotistical director Alan who begrudgingly goes along with Alan's plans to head off to an island that serves as a for deranged criminals and have some fun at the burial grounds. They settle into a cottage on the island and subsequently go out into the graveyard, exhume the corpse of a man named Orville, and Alan (with some Druid spell book) does a ritual that's meant to summon the dead. Alan then seems disappointed that nothing happens, and goes as far as to take Orville's corpse back to the cottage while degrading his actors and threatening to fire them if they simply don't agree with them.
Then, as they're back at the cottage, the tombstones start to move and the ground starts collapsing as the dead rise from their graves to take revenge on Alan's group. One by one, the zombies eat the troupe and then (thankfully) Alan himself. The end credits show the zombies taking Alan's boat and going towards Miami.
While entertaining, this film is flawed. One of my biggest issues is the pacing. And in this regard, it's the fact that the zombies don't show up until an hour or so (at least) into the movie. It creates enough of an eerie atmosphere to have a payoff, but said payoff feels too short. As a result, the story is a good one, but with inert pacing.
The acting and dialog are cheesy, but credits got to Anya Ormsby in particular for her bizarre performance. Most of the time she stares wide eyed into the distance, but there's this one scene where she FREAKS OUT because she senses the dead are coming. That worked. The Cinematography and editing, likewise, are also a bit cheesy, but all of it adds on to the aesthetic of the film, so in a way, it works.
In conclusion, the first of Bob Clark's early 70's horror anthology trilogy began with this film, and it's a raw but promising start. I'd say give it a viewing or two.
Dead of Night (1974)
Almost 50 year old piece of celluloid cinema tells a tragic horror story
I've already reviewed Black Christmas. THAT film is among the best Bob Clark's filmography. A few months before that film however, came Deathdream A.K.A Dead Of Night.
The film is about a young man named Andy Brooks (Richard Backus), and at the start of the film he is killed in Vietnam during war. His barely-stable family hears of this news and is devastated. Particularly his mother, who refuses to believe Andy is dead. Later that night, Andy inexplicably arrives home in one piece. He does, however, start to display suspicious behavior, which starts to divide the family and cause tension between them. The other characters in the film are just there, but Andy's mom and dad have a dynamic that adds mystery to Andy, as do his respective relationships with his parents.
As the film progresses, the mystery behind Andy's behavior in question unravels itself. The pacing is not bad. A little slow, but other than that it works. It's eventually revealed in the second act that Andy has apparently returned home as some kind of bloodthirsty human parasite (a vampire or zombie are both anyone's guesses) who kills at night to obtain blood to keep his body from rotting and decaying. The skin special effects in this film were the first of Tom Savini's career, and he would later go on to do Friday The 13th in 1980.
While on the subject of Friday The 13th (and Black Christmas), Deathdream also uses the POV shots BEFORE either film was made. But the most interesting connection this movie has with Black Christmas, is its soundtrack. In my review of Black Christmas, I mentioned how the soundtrack for that film was made using a piano with combs and forks attached to the key strings. Deathdream uses a slightly different version of that eerie minimalist soundtrack, but other than that, the scare cues and suspenseful music is IDENTICAL.
The Acting and Dialog is pretty average, the Cinematography and Editing is fine, and the Story is a decent one. In conclusion, Deathdream is a film worthy of checking out in terms of period piece horror. It's not as enjoyable as Black Christmas in my opinion, but Deathdream certainly deserves credit and acknowledgement when looking back on Bob Clark's experimental yet fascinating filmography.
Superbad (2007)
The king of 2000's raunchy comedies. A classic worthy of living on for generations to come.
This review is dedicated to the memory of Blockbuster.
Sometime in on a weekend in early 2011, my mom and I went up to Blockbuster (when it was still widespread) and she let me rent Superbad. As a sixth grader at the age of 12, this was a big honor, and naturally I was going to enjoy the film. I did, but I enjoy it more than ever now as an adult.
For this review, I watched the film again on Netflix (which was the theatrical version and not the Unrated Extended Edition I also own). The plot of the film follows two best friends (nice guy Evan and caustic Seth) who are going off to two different colleges and facing separation anxiety. The first 15 or so minutes of the film firmly establishes this while containing a variety of sex jokes. Those sex jokes quickly subsidize a little around the 30 minute mark where the film picks up. By that point, the opportunity to buy booze for a party that their respective high school sweethearts are having lands in Evan and Seth's laps, with their mutual friend Fogell acquiring a fake ID with the name McLovin on it. From there, the plan goes awry and things change direction for the sake of hilarity ensuing, and the comedy is done well.
The cinematography and editing are seamlessly done, with the dialog and acting ranging from hilarious to a trifle over exaggerating. It barely works, but as a first time viewer, it's perfect. It sticks with you.
Now back to the story. It's well written for what it is, and very well paced, especially considering the fact that Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg based the script loosely off of their own lives as high school seniors.
Overall, Superbad is a film that deserves recognition in the years to come. It's a classic.
Black Christmas (1974)
What emerged in 1974 as modestly successful on a low-budget resurfaces as one of the most disturbing films ever made 40 years later. A true cult classic worthy of recognition.
Sometime after I became reacquainted with horror films during Halloween season in 2017- about a month after I saw IT in theaters- I was up late in the living room one night after my parents went to bed and browsing through a horror and B-movie streaming service when I came across Black Christmas (1974). I did not know what to expect, but what followed the next 100 minutes not only didn't disappoint me like most modern films do, it actually managed to DISTURB me a bit and keep me away from the attic for about a week. With that, I believe that Black Christmas stood the test of time and may very well be one of the most disturbing films ever made. Black Christmas is truly a great horror film worthy of recognition.
Directed by Benjamin Robert "Bob" Clark (of A Christmas Story fame) after two other low-budget horror films (Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things in 1972 and Deathdream A.K.A. Dead Of Night in 1974), Bob Clark reached the height of his horror career with this film, as it manages to go above and beyond in terms of story, cinematography, editing, acting, dialog, and soundtrack. Black Christmas was initially released on October 11th, 1974 in Canada before being released in the United States on December 20th later that same year under the title "Silent Night, Evil Night". It was later rereleased in American theaters on December 26th, 1975 bearing the title we all know and love.
First, the STORY. Black Christmas tells the tale of college girls who are staying at a sorority house during the holidays when a stranger with some form of psychosis sneaks and breaks into said house through the attic (where The Stranger, dubbed "Billy, spends the majority of the entire film) and eventually starts to kill them off one by one. Unlike Clark's last two films, the idea behind the antagonist isn't supernatural like a zombie or vampire, but rather something very close to a mentally-ill person with a home invasion involved. This approach WORKS, as it is a concept that is grounded in reality. It COULD happen to someone in real life. This becomes nightmarish when at the end of the film, little is revealed and we still know close to nothing about "Billy"- his motivations, backstory, and what he LOOKS like all withstanding. Making the killer as enigmatic as possible was another thing that worked; it really enforces the idea that the unknown is terrifying.
Then, we have the EDITING. The film sets the tone right away using two of your five senses with a long and aged shot of the house with eerie Christmas carolers singing "Silent Night, Holy Night" in the background as the title fades in with the opening credits. THIS is how you establish an ominous and atmospheric mood. It WORKS. Bob Clark's Black Christmas is a VERY dark and disturbing motion picture, and it has been said that John Carpenter's Halloween (1978) started out as a POTENTIAL SEQUEL to this film. Carpenter and Clark were discussing the film while working on an unmade/unreleased project, where Carpenter asked (Clark) if there was going to be a sequel, and what it would be about. Clark told him that he had no plans to do a sequel, but if there were to be one, the Stranger/killer would've eventually been caught and would've escaped from a mental asylum on Halloween the following year...and he would call it "Halloween". The Halloween that materialized in 1978 had a catchy minimalist soundtrack that is iconic amongst horror fans, but Black Christmas's soundtrack (by Carl Zittrer) was constructed using a piano with forks, combs, and knives onto the strings of it to warp the sound keys, as well as distort the sound further by recording the sounds onto an audiotape and make the sound slower. If this isn't a well composed piece of minimalist music, I don't know what is. I also want to point out that the smallest things, such as the distant sound of a dog barking in the background adds on to the unnerving nature of the film. I can't fully explain it, but it WORKS.
Next, we have the CINEMATOGRAPHY. Right after the opening credits, a shaky POV shot (later used in Halloween) is shown approaching the house, climbing a trellis into the attic, and lurking around the house. We mostly see the killer as a shadow on the wall in some shots and his POV in others. the former is especially effective during the shot where the killer is carrying his first victim up to the attic. We are shown the first floor from the stairs as the camera pans up, revealing The Stranger's walking legs as he walks out of frame, leaving us with only his shadow carrying the body and eerie sound effects in the background. The most iconic scenes that are the CLOSEST we get to ever seeing "Billy", we see him about to stab someone with his ENITRE BODY (sans left eye) framed in shadow, and we later see that same eye peeking through a crack in the door. This approach strengthens the enigmatic nature of the character, and that works too. Another scene that disturbs me the more I think about it, is a scene after his second kill where he abruptly starts SCREAMING and TRASHING the attic (shown through POV) OUT OF NOWHERE. This particular moment is one of the most disturbing scenes in the film.
The ACTING and DIALOG. The characters aren't poorly written and have some development at best, while certain others are disposable. Our (deconstructed) final girl Jessica Bradford (Olivia Hussey) is pregnant by her boyfriend Peter (Keir Dullea) and wants to get an abortion despite his urging against it, thus setting him up as an effective red-herring. (Margot Kidder)'s Barb steals to show as she (and to a bigger extent, the house mother) spend most of the movie getting drunk and becoming memorable out of it. John Saxon and the other actors did an excellent job. Their dialog is well-written and adds depth to the characters. "Billy"/The Stranger, on the other hand, interacts almost exclusively with the other characters through a series of nonsensical yet disturbing obscene phone calls. The noises he makes on the phone are HORRIFYING, partially because it seems as if multiple voices are coming through the other line mixed in with grotesque-sounding animal noises.
In conclusion, Bob Clark's Black Christmas is an underrated classic that is worthy of the recognition it gets, and personally deserves more, ESPECIALLY considering that Halloween (1978) wouldn't have existed without it. The combination of the overall tone, music, acting, and special effects make Black Christmas into a well-crafted masterpiece, and even though it's been nearly 50 YEARS since it's initial release, it STILL holds up as a film.
If you plan on buying a copy, look no further than the Scream Factory 2-disc Collector's Edition from 2016. It includes a restoration of the original negative and interchangeable audio set-up on the first disc, and a bonus disc with the 2008 Critical Mass Blu-Ray and EVERY special feature included in past home video releases. A true essential in terms of a Christmas movie gift.