Connect with us

Editorials

Horror Retrospective: 1934 (Editorial)

Published

on

THE YEAR: 1934

The previous editorials (years 1931-1933) all contained movies that have come to be considered “Pre-Code.” The “Code” in “Pre-Code” is none other than the maligned Motion Picture Production Code, or, as it’s popularly known, the Hays Code. The Hays Code lasted from 1934 until the late-1960s, when it became the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) which we know and love today. What was the point of the Hays Code? As with so many other forms of censorship, it was meant to save you, gentle viewer, from that irresponsible individual known as yourself. You cannot possibly make a mature decision about what explicit content you deem acceptable, so the censors conveniently do it for you – how nice! That’s not to say the films on this (and future) lists aren’t worthy of your time. In a way, writers and directors had to get more creative and resort to something that is sadly lacking in many modern horror films: the power of suggestion. The five films described below are all excellent examples of what we’ll call “Hays Code Horror,” and I think that you’ll find that they’re every bit as engrossing as their “Pre-Code” predecessors.

THE BLACK CAT

(D) Edgar G. Ulmer
(W) Peter Ruric
(S) Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, and David Manners

After several years of starring in their own genre films, Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi finally shared the screen in this (loose) adaptation of the Edgar Allan Poe tale. Lugosi plays Dr. Vitus Werdegast, a psychiatrist who, while spending time in a prison camp in World War I, mysteriously lost his wife. On his way to meet Hjalmar Poelzig (Karloff), his friend and reclusive architect, Werdegast encounters newlyweds Peter (Manners) and Joan Alison (Jacqueline Wells), who are on their honeymoon. After their bus crashes in the Hungarian countryside and Joan is injured, the three travelers make their way to Poelzig’s home. It is there that Werdegast discovers what has happened to his wife and uncovers Poelzig’s dark plans for the injured Joan. Despite their well-known dislike for one another off screen, Karloff is at his sinister best, Lugosi – in a rare sympathetic role – is quite good, and the screen comes alive when the two icons share it.

black_cat

BLACK MOON

(D) Roy William Neill
(W) Wells Root
(S) Jack Holt, Fay Wray, and Dorothy Burgess

Black Moon is an early film about the seductive power of voodoo. The story revolves around a woman named Juanita (Burgess), who had discovered her parents’ corpses as a child. Apparently, Juanita’s folks were the victims of voodoo performed by the inhabitants of a tropical island where Juanita and her family were staying. Now an adult, Juanita (along with her daughter, Cora Sue) has an irresistible urge to return to the island of her childhood trauma. Once she returns, the island’s denizens treat Juanita as a voodoo goddess of sorts, and she is afforded every luxury. Juanita becomes so drunk with power, that she is willing to sacrifice her own daughter in the name of voodoo. Will her husband (Holt) and his secretary (Wray) be able to save Cora Sue (Nancy Lane), or will Juanita claim her prize? Part mystery, part horror, this little-known gem is atmospheric and well-acted – check it out!

black_moon

EL FANTASMA DEL CONVENTO (THE PHANTOM OF THE MONASTERY)

(D) Fernando de Fuentes
(W) Juan Bustillo Oro, Jorge Pezet, and Fernando de Fuentes
(S) Enrique del Campo, Marta Roel, and Carlos Villatoro

As so many other horror films are, El fantasma del convento is essentially a morality tale. Adulterous couple Cristina (Roel) and Alfonso (del Campo) become lost one night while attempting to find a good make out spot. Enter a bizarre guide of sorts – is it ever wise to follow a stranger in a horror film? – who leads the pair to a foreboding monastery.  Cristina and Alfonso are treated to a dinner with the Father Superior (Paco Martinez), who relates a story involving a monk overcome by his lust for a woman. After he seduced his friend’s wife, the rest of the monk’s life – and even his afterlife – were cursed. You can probably guess where the story goes from here, but don’t let a little predictability deter you from seeing this beautifully shot and eerie film. For those of you who are fans of Matthew Lewis’ 1796 horror novel, The Monk, you will certainly see the book’s influence in the film.

phantasma

THE NINTH GUEST

(D) Roy William Neill
(W) Garnett Weston
(S) Donald Cook, Genevieve Tobin, and Hardie Albright

Based on the 1930 novel The Invisible Host by Gwen Bristow and Bruce Manning, The Ninth Guest is another fine early example of the haunted house subgenre. An anonymous host invites a group of eight disparate strangers to a luxurious apartment for the night. Once the guests are in the apartment and have experienced some fine food and drink, the host – via radio broadcast – reveals the real reason he invited them to the apartment: they have to outwit Death (the titular character) if they want to survive the night. Inventive death scenes and solid acting highlight this rarely seen oddity. I would like to think that the Saw and Final Destination franchises owe a debt of gratitude to this one.

ninth_guest

DOUBLE DOOR

(D) Charles Vidor
(W) Jack Cunningham and Gladys Lehman
(S) Evelyn Venable, Mary Morris, and Anne Revere

Based on the play by Elizabeth McFadden, Double Door is a chilling commentary on family dysfunction. The wealthy but psychotic Victoria Van Brett (Morris) terrorizes the members of her family who still live under her roof. Her favorite method of torture is to lure unwitting family members into the secret chamber, where they slowly go mad from isolation. When Victoria turns her ire to her half-brother’s wife, the only family member capable – or willing – to stand up to Victoria is her sister, Caroline (Revere). The performances in the film are decent overall (particularly Morris), but there is some staginess to the play adaptation. The real reason to see this film is for the setting – a creepy old mansion in New York City that leaves you guessing what’s around every corner.

double_door

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