Connect with us

Editorials

Trace’s 5 Worst Horror Movies of 2016

Published

on

5. The Greasy Strangler

There is an audience out there for The Greasy Strangler. I’m just not a part of it. Granted, this is a film that is meant to be seen on the big screen in a sold out theater at midnight. I watched a screener by myself in my living room, so the atmosphere may not have been ideal. On the surface Jim Hosking’s film, about an elderly man (Michael St. Michaels) who covers himself in grease and strangles people when his relationship with his son (Sky Elobar) becomes strained after a woman (Eastbound & Down‘s Elizabeth De Razzo) enters their lives. There are plenty of disgusting moments and gross-out images present in the film, but they’re unable to hold your interest amidst the same jokes that are repeated over and over and over (and over) again. It gets boring after a while, and if a film with as much going on as The Greasy Strangler can bore you then it isn’t very good, no matter how intentional that badness is. If you enjoy The Greasy Strangler, good for you! But I’m going to hootie tootie disco cutie on out of here. I guess I’m just a bullshit artist.

worst horror films of 2016


4. Yoga Hosers

As someone who actually likes all of Kevin Smith’s work with the exception of Cop Out and Mallrats (yes, I even like Jersey Girl), I went in to Yoga Hosers with low expectations and somehow still walked out disappointed. The second installment in Smith’s True North Trilogy which began in 2014 with Tusk and will conclude with Moose Jaws* is a sloppy, unfunny inside “joke” that only Smith seems to be in on. This is a film where Smith plays multiple 1′ tall Nazi Bratwursts (Bratzis) that crawl up people’s butts and out their mouths to harass the titular yoga hosers (the two Colleens from Tusk) who are played by his daughter (Harley Quinn Smith) and Johnny Depp’s daughter  (Lily-Rose Depp). The film’s 88 minutes are filled with obnoxious Canadian stereotypes (do you think Canadians saying “aboot” instead of “about” is funny? You’re about to hear a lot of it) and some cringe-worthy attempts at humor. The two leads are charming but must work with a script that is so pedestrian that you have to wonder if Smith was trying to sabotage his daughter. It’s telling when the best part of your movie is a music video (of the Colleens singing “O Canada”) shot during the credits.

Call me a glutton for punishment, but I’m still excited for Moose Jaws.

worst horror films of 2016


3. Phantasm: Ravager

I will get a lot of shit for this so I’m steeling myself for the comments, but I really did not enjoy Phantasm: Ravager. I am not a fan of the Phantasm franchise, so I’m the last person that should be reviewing the fifth and final entry, but here I am. Had I grown up watching the films my opinion may be different than it is now, but I unfortunately saw the first three films when I was 25 (I have yet to see the fourth). It’s just not my cup o’ tea. That being said, I can’t imagine anyone enjoying this film (though some people certainly have). It plays like a cheaply made student film. While it was made on an extremely low budget over the course of several years, first time feature director David Hartman simply doesn’t have the skill to make this movie. It is clear that a lot of heart is in the film and everyone had good intentions, but it’s a stretch to even call this a film. The editing is atrocious, the acting is sub-par and the script is nonsensical (though that’s sort of a Phantasm trademark). The effects are laughably bad but I won’t hold that against it since that’s the least of the film’s problems. You may think I’m being too harsh on a film whose intentions are so pure, but I just think of how I would feel if another Scream (my favorite horror franchise) film ever got made and turned out like this. As a fan I would feel insulted. This is how Phantasm fans should feel after seeing this movie. I’m genuinely happy for the fans though. They did get an ending to their beloved franchise. I just don’t get it.

worst horror films of 2016


2. Cell

Stephen King adaptations are notorious for being hit-or-missCell definitely falls into the “miss” category. While we were gifted this year with Hulu’s amazing adaptation of 11/22/63 back in February, June finally saw the release of Cell, an adaptation that could have afforded to spend a little more time in post-production (or maybe it couldn’t?). After being announced in 2007 (Eli Roth was originally attached to direct it), Cell was stuck in development hell before finally starting production in 2014. John Cusack is doing his best Nicolas Cage impression while Samuel L. Jackson looks embarrassed to be there. The nine-year delay didn’t help things, as Cell was a product of its time, making the film adaptation feel outdated and irrelevant to today’s society. The film starts strongly with a sequence set in an airport that inspires genuine chills, but it’s all downhill from there. Cell is filled with clichés, not very scary and actually pretty silly. This is a film that was slapped together haphazardly in the editing room and dumped quietly on VOD services, showing that no one involved was proud of what they created. And they shouldn’t be.

worst horror films of 2016


1. Cabin Fever

The big question surrounding Travis Zariwny’s remake of Eli Roth’s 2002 gorefest is: Why? The film used the same script but switched out the cast and crew (Roth stuck around to executive produce though). It is essentially the same film but with all of Roth’s trademark humor and playfulness removed, making for a miserable viewing experience. Rather than tackle the screenplay with a different approach, Zariwny is content to sleepwalk through the filming process and play the whole thing straight. It does not improve upon the original in any way. Shockingly, the film is even less gory than Roth’s original. None of the actors look like they’re enjoying themselves. Cabin Fever 2016 is an appalling, pointless and (worst of all) boring film. It may be the worst remake ever made.

worst horror films of 2016

Pages: 1 2

A journalist for Bloody Disgusting since 2015, Trace writes film reviews and editorials, as well as co-hosts Bloody Disgusting's Horror Queers podcast, which looks at horror films through a queer lens. He has since become dedicated to amplifying queer voices in the horror community, while also injecting his own personal flair into film discourse. Trace lives in Austin, TX with his husband and their two dogs. Find him on Twitter @TracedThurman

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading