Connect with us

Editorials

‘Final Destination’ – Death and the Inescapable Boogeyman

Published

on

The Final Destination series is one of the most fun and entertaining horror franchises out there. The first film was released back in 2000 and since then, the series has grown to spawn four sequels (most of which are good) and a devoted fanbase. Each film focuses on a different group of people being stalked by Death after they have narrowly managed to avoid certain doom in some sort of horrific accident. The series is massively fun – always delivering a thrilling experience, while never taking itself too seriously.

Taking a page from the slasher genre and using it to write its own rules, the series employs an ever-present, yet somewhat unconventional boogeyman – Death itself. Though never actually personified, Death is a presence throughout each of these stories, stalking around, silent and unseen by all. It influences the scene and the characters’ surroundings to build elaborate traps to ensnare its unsuspecting victims. The basis for the series revolves around Death having a very specific plan – a design. Everyone has their own appointed time to die, and if circumstances cause that plan to go awry, Death must correct the mistake.

Each film focuses on a group of people who manage to elude their own deaths as a part of a major catastrophe, only to find themselves targeted by the mysterious reaper in the weeks following the event. They are hunted down one by one and eventually succumb to a fate they thought they had avoided. Death is a tricky hunter though, and it lays traps that are not easily avoided. Red herrings, complex setups and out of nowhere turns surprise the victims in their final moments. It is these sequences that make the films such a blast to watch. As it happens, Death can be massively entertaining when it designs an elaborate mousetrap around its victims when they think they are the least vulnerable.

FINAL DESTINATION 5 via New Line

But as much fun as the series is, it also works on a more somber level. More than other horror franchises, there is a truth at the center of it. And that is that death is inevitable.  That every single one of us will die. The characters in these films seek to escape their deaths, but really, the only victory that can be achieved is putting them off.  The punchline of these films is that when you least expect it, Death will circle back around and cross you off of its list once and for all. But even if these characters were to succeed in their quest and Death were to bow and admit defeat, it would be a temporary victory. Death will always return eventually. Even if you don’t mess with death’s design, it will come for you one day. It is a certainty.

As Tony Todd’s recurring character Bludworth notes in the first entry, “In death, there are no accidents. No coincidences, no mishaps…and no escapes. What you have to realize is that we’re all just a mouse that a cat has by the tail.”

We talk a lot about how horror films allow the audience to examine and accept our own mortality in a safe environment. By seeing the deaths of characters acted out onscreen from the comfort of a theater chair or our own couch, we are able to process the fact that as mortal beings, we will one day die. The Final Destination series is perhaps the most direct application of this theory. One way or another, be it today, next month or 50 years from now, we will have to face Death. Granted, we might not all be accidentally stabbed when a knife falls from the butcher block underneath the towel we were trying to grab to stop the bleeding from a glass shard embedded in our neck when the vodka we were drinking caused our computer monitor to explode and start a fire, but we will, at some point in time, bite it. Plain and simple. Death will come for every one of us.

That inevitability is part of what makes this series so enjoyable, in a way. If death is a certainty and is ultimately unavoidable, then we are allowed to have a bit of fun with the concept. And the Final Destination films embrace that sense of fun head-on. The kill sequences are fantastic, always beginning with a slow build of suspense as Death lays its elaborate traps and then springs them in the craziest way possible. The onscreen deaths range from clever and complex to borderline ridiculous. Tanning beds, trains, weights, elevators, nail guns and lasers (among other things) are all implements of destruction at one time or another. Death has a rather twisted sense of humor, and it is clear that it enjoys its work almost as much as we do. Ultimately, this all serves not only as a means to entertain, but to keep things from getting too heavy and allow us to pull back a bit and simply enjoy ourselves in the knowledge of our own mortality.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading